Full text of "Americana"

See other formats

Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2016

https://archive.org/details/americana33amer

AMERICANA

VOLUME XXXIII
January, 1939 — December, 1939

The American Historical Company, Inc.
80-90 Eighth Avenue
New York

(ILLUSTRATED)

Copyrighted, 1939, by

The American Historical Company, Inc.

Entered at the Somerville, N. J., Post Office as Second Class Mail Matter

440964

CONTENTS

VOLUME XXXIII
January, 1939 — December, 1939

Adams, Henry, and the Civil War, by Charles I. Glicksberg, Ph. D. . . . 443

Alaska, The Totems of, by Norris W. Matthews 476

American Poetry, The Columbus Theme in, by Bertha Monica Stearns . 7

Ancestor-Hunting in Germany, by First Lieutenant Karl Frederick

Steinhauer 222

Archer, Gleason L., LL. D., Pioneers of the Rock-Bound Coast (Part

IV) 42

Archer, Gleason L., LL. D., Pioneers of the Rock-Bound Coast (Part

V) 349

Archer, Gleason L., LL. D., Pioneers of the Rock-Bound Coast (Con-
clusion) 488

Asphalt — Origin, History, Development — Its Relation to Petroleum, by

Joseph Rock Draney 196

Birch, John J., Ps. D., Battle of the Kinquariones (The) 419

Book Reviews 130

Bryan, E. H., Jr., Guam and the Chamorros 15

Bryant, William Cullen, Letters by, by Charles I. Glicksberg, Ph. D . . . . 23

Chamorros, Guam and the, by E. H. Bryan, Jr 15

Civil War, Henry Adams and (The), by Charles I. Glicksberg, Ph. D. . 443

Columbus Theme in American Poetry (The), by Bertha Monica Stearns 7

Confederacy, The Queen of the, by Craddock Goins 141

Davis, Richard Beale, George Sandys, Poet-Adventurer 180

Death of a Beautiful Woman (The), by Ethel Lyon 415

Draney, Joseph Rock, Asphalt — Origin, History, Development — Its Re-
lation to Petroleum 196

Finley, Herold R., Skinner and Allied Families 424

Finley, Herold R., Mason and Allied Families 232

Fleming, Captain Alexander and Joyce, His Wife, of “Westfalia,” Rap-
pahannock County, Virginia, by Lenora Higginbotham Sweeny .... 326

Germany, Ancestor-Hunting in, by First Lieutenant Karl Frederick

Steinhauer 222

Glicksberg, Charles I., Ph. D., Letters by William Cullen Bryant. ... 23

Glicksberg, Charles I., Ph. D., Henry Adams and the Civil War. . . . 443

Goins, Craddock, The Queen of the Confederacy 141

Guam and the Chamorros, by E. H. Bryan, Jr 15

CONTENTS

Hastings, George E., Ph. D., Francis Hopkinson and the American Flag 293
Hopkinson, Francis and the American Flag, by George E. Hastings,

Ph. D 293

Kinquariones, The Battle of the, by John J. Birch, Ps. D 419

Latimer and Allied Families, by J. J. McDonald 89

Letters by William Cullen Bryant, by Charles I. Glicksberg, Ph. D 23

Lewis, Myrtle M., Spencer and Allied Families 548

Lyon, Ethel, The Death of a Beautiful Woman 415

Mason and Allied Families, by Herold R. Finley 232

Matthews, Norris W., The Totems of Alaska 476

MacDougall, Allan Ross, John Howard Payne (1791-1852) 463

McDonald, J. J., Latimer and Allied Families 89

“Packet,” Voyage of the Ship to South America and China, 1817, by

James Wilbert Snyder, Jr 310

Payne, John Howard (1791-1852), by Allan Ross MacDougall 463

Pioneers of the Rock-Bound Coast (Part IV), by Gleason L. Archer,

LL. D 42

Pioneers of the Rock-Bound Coast (Part V), by Gleason L. Archer

LL. D 349

Pioneers of the Rock-Bound Coast (Conclusion), by Gleason L. Arch-
er, LL. D 488

Poet- Adventurer, George Sandys, by Richard Beale Davis 180

Queen of the Confederacy, The, by Craddock Goins 141

Rusk, Prof. William Sener, Thomas U. Walter and His Works 151

Sandys, George, Poet-Adventurer, by Richard Beale Davis 180

Skinner and Allied Families, by Herold R. Finley 424

Snyder, James Wilbert, Jr., Voyage of the Ship “Packet” to South

America and China, 1817 310

Spencer and Allied Families, by Myrtle M. Lewis 54&

Stearns, Bertha Monica, The Columbus Theme in American Poetry ... 7

Steinhauer, First Lieutenant Karl Frederick, Ancestor-Hunting in Ger-
many 222

Sweeny, Lenora Higginbotham, Captain Alexander Fleming and Joyce,

His Wife, of “Westfalia,” Rappahannock County, Virginia 326

Totems of Alaska (The), by Norris W. Matthews 476

Voyage of the Ship “Packet” to South America and China, 1817, by

James Wilbert Snyder, Jr 310

Walter, Thomas U., and His Works, by Prof. William Sener Rusk. ... 151

Woman, The Death of a Beautiful, by Ethel Lyon 415

ILLUSTRATIONS

Alaska, Map of Southeastern 476

Allerton Coat-of-Arms 270

American Red Cross, Join Frontispiece No. 4

Asphalt Highways, New York City and California 200

Boghall Castle, Ancient Home of the Lords of Fleming 332

Boston and Environs 349

Bunker Hill Monument, Charlestown 368

Capitol, East Front of, Washington, D. C 196

Capron Park, Memorial Gateway to Between 248-249

“Capron Park” Between 248-249

Carpenter Coat-of-Arms 241

Carpenter, Shepard Wheaton 247

Chicago Airport — Asphalt Runways 212

Collins Coat-of-Arms 432

Copley Square, Boston 534

Couchman (Cushman) Coat-of-Arms 276

Cumbernald, The Right Hon.ble The Earl of Wigtowne Lord Fleming

and, Coat-of-Arms 326

Dumbarton Castle (West Side) About 1685 Frontispiece No. 3

Faneuil Hall and The Custom House Tower Building, Boston 384

Farm-to-Market Road — Asphaltic Type 208

Gardens, Public, Boston 534

German Genealogical Questionnaires 222

Girard College Views 168

Guam Views 15, 19

Heraldic Device of Lagash (2850 B. C.) 200

Hodges Coat-of-Arms 255

Hopkins Coat-of-Arms 270

Hopkinson, Francis, Letter to Board of Admiralty Between 294-295

Hopkinson, Francis, Bill Rendered 297

La Brea Pit Park, Los Angeles 218

Lackawanna Trail, Pennsylvania 208

Lancaster County Deeds, Etc., No. 1, 1652-57, Page From, in Virginia

State Library 336

Latimer Coat-of-Arms 89

Latimer Family Group 102

Latimer, Margaret Moore 121

Latimer, N. H 97

Mason Coat-of-Arms 233

ILLUSTRATIONS

Mason, Frederick G 239

Mason Residence, Garden Views, Attleboro, Mass . . . Between 236-37, 238-39

Mayflower Compact 283

Mississippi River Revetment Views 216, 218

Monhegan Island Views 42, 50

Morton Coat-of-Arms 270

Moore Coat-of-Arms 117

Oddities in American History 132

Oddities in American History 434

“Packet” Journal in New York Public Library Page from 310, 320

Peck Coat-of-Arms 270

Protestant Archives Building at Speyer am Rhein, Germany (The) . . . 224

Revere, Paul, The House of, Boston 349

Ring Coat-of-Arms 270

Salem Views 58, 66, 82

Sandys, George 180

Skinner Coat-of-Arms 424

Skinner, Henry Between 426-427

State House, Boston 384

State House (The Old), Boston 368

Suburban Residence 212

Theme Center of the New York World’s Fair Frontispiece No. 2

Title Page of The Oldest Existing Registry-Book of Lutheran Church

of Lauterecken Parish (for the years 1569-95) 228

Totem, The Bear, at Wrangell 486

Winsted Gas Company (The), Office Building, Winsted, Connecti-
cut Between 426-427

AMERICANA

JANUARY, 1939

Tlie Columbus Th

eme m

jnerican

P oetry

By Bertha Monica Stearns,

Professor of English, Wellesley College, Massachusetts

story of Columbus and his varied fortunes seemed to
ishington Irving, as he pointed out in his biography of
great mariner, “the link which connects the history of
old world with that of the new.” American writers
from the beginning of our national literature until the present time
have seen in that story a subject for poetry that should express the
ideals of the New World, and symbolize the groping of humanity
for a better way of life. The persistence of this theme and of this
symbol throughout a century and a half of kaleidoscopic changes in
the American scene testifies to the strength of the poetic conception
that the welfare of all humanity, as individuals, not as states, is the
guiding vision of true nationalism. It is interesting, therefore, to
note, as a commentary upon American idealism, the varied treatments
of what may be called the Columbus theme in the works of representa-
tive American poets living at different periods.

In 1774 a young Princeton poet, Philip Freneau, just three years
out of college, produced a series of poems which he grouped together
under the title “Pictures of Columbus.” The ardent nationalism of
the youthful writer had already shown itself in some commencement
verses called “The Rising Glory of America,” in which he set forth
the possibilities of a land free to follow its dreams unrestrained by the
domination of the past. “The Pictures of Columbus” continued to

THE COLUMBUS THEME IN AMERICAN POETRY

voice his belief that hope of greatness for the New World lay in the
enterprise of individuals, as opposed to the overlordship and dictation
of rulers. Freneau’s scenes from the life of Columbus include a pic-
ture of young Columbus making maps and dreaming dreams; of an
older Columbus addressing the Spanish court and meeting the oppo-
sition of an established order; of an intrepid adventurer surmounting
his difficulties at sea and by his courage bringing the ends of the earth
into communication with each other; of an aged hero rewarded by
selfish royalty only with chains and poverty.

The Columbus of this poem is dominated by a compelling purpose :
It is a bold attempt! Yet I must go,

he reflects. At the end of his life, as he lies ill and discredited, his
spirit remains courageously undaunted:

The winds blow high: one other world remains;

Once more without a guide I find the way.

Meditating upon the thankfulness of kings and upon the spiritual
barrenness of realms where no liberty is, he rejoices that in time his
toils will be rewarded and his woes repaid in the new land :

When empires rise where lonely forests grew,

Where Freedom shall her generous plans pursue.

Columbus is to Freneau, in this eighteenth century poem, the symbol
of a free and independent spirit refusing to be dominated by the
forces of the past, or by the tyranny of selfish power. The new world
is represented as the home of that spirit in which the “generous
plans” of a true freedom may work themselves out in new ways.

In the years during and immediately following the American
Revolution, another ambitious young poet, Joel Barlow, graduate of
Yale, voiced his dream of national greatness in a long narrative poem
which he called the “Vision of Columbus.” Later he elaborated this
work into an epic of over eight thousand lines, calling it “The Colum-
biad.” Fired by the belief that the newly established republic was
indeed a promised land, he determined to

Sing the Mariner who first unfurl’d
An eastern banner o’er the western world,

and to proclaim in verse all that the discoveries of Columbus might
mean to the progress of civilization.

THE COLUMBUS THEME IN AMERICAN POETRY

Barlow represents the Genius of the Western World as revealing
to Columbus, through a series of visions, the future history of the
land he has discovered. The settlement of the colonies, the Revolu-
tionary War, the establishment of the new government, all pass before
the eyes of the hero. The poet then looks forward to the years to
come. Columbus is shown that he has opened the way to a better
civilization than the world has yet known. America is to lead human-
ity into ways of peace and rational liberty; the objectives of its states-
men are not to be personal, not to be national, but are to be world-
wide in their scope :

No more the noble patriot mind,

To narrow views and local laws confined,

Gainst neighboring lands directs the public rage,

Plots for a realm or counsels for an age.

But lifts a larger thought, and reaches far,

Beyond the power, beyond the wish of war;

For realms and ages form the general aim,

Makes patriot views and moral views the same,

Sees with prophetic eye in peace combined
The strength and happiness of human kind.

Nor is the vision complete with this general prediction of a
rational world order. Barlow presents a specific picture of a con-
gress of nations meeting together and working out political harmony
for all the governments of the earth. Columbus is permitted to see
in his final vision “the fathers of all empires” assembling for this task,
electing a presiding officer, and deliberating wisely how best

To give each realm its limit and its laws;

Bid the last breath of dire contention cease,

And bind all regions in the leagues of peace.

A half century before Tennyson’s “Parliament of man, the Fed-
eration of the world,” the idealistic nationalism of a patriotic poet
inspired this flight of fancy far in advance of the times. Columbus,
with his adventurous spirit, his belief in his destiny, his courage in
attempting the untried, becomes the poetic symbol of an America
which is to lead mankind into a brave new world of political justice.

Almost forty years later another young poet reasserted the Ameri-
can dream and expressed his faith in an ideal through the symbol of
the dauntless adventurer. In the midst of social and economic changes

THE COLUMBUS THEME IN AMERICAN POETRY

which were rapidly transforming national life during the early decades
of the nineteenth century, James Russell Lowell looked question-
ingly at the world around him. Was the growing nation to lose its
belief in a destiny different from that of the older states of Europe?
Was mankind in America stupidly to tread life underfoot in the
brawl for means to live? Was materialism to dominate the spirit of
man? Lowell could not believe that this was to be the fate of his
native land. His idealism found expression in a blank verse poem of
almost three hundred lines, entitled “Columbus,” in which he fortified
his own deepest convictions through a dramatization of an inner con-
flict in the mind of his hero.

Columbus is represented as gazing out from his ship over an
unknown sea and meditating upon his dangerous enterprise. He feels
a closer sympathy with the stars above him than with his immediate
companions :

Earthen souls, whose vision’s scanty ring
Makes me its prisoner to beat my wings
Against the cold bars of their unbelief.

He grieves over the stupidtiy of the “mad, unthrift world,”

Which every hour throws life enough away
To make her deserts kind and hospitable.

He is saddened by the thought of the ease with which men may
lose their visions, and sadly reflects,

The wicked and the weak, by some dark law
Have a strange power to shut and rivet down
Their own horizon ’round us.

Then, with new hope, he remembers that it is the Old World
which has denied his dreams, an ancient way of life in which no
state “holds up a shape of large humanity.” Will the untried land of
his vision, he asks, play over the same tragedy? Or, instead, shall a
commonwealth be built there in which humanity may find a true home
— a commonwealth

Whose potent unity and concentric force

Can draw these scattered joints and parts of men

Into a whole ideal man once more.

Whatever his doubts, Columbus has no choice but to go on in
answer to a call that he has heard since boyhood:

THE COLUMBUS THEME IN AMERICAN POETRY

To the spirit select there is no choice;

He cannot say, this will I do, or that,

For the cheap means putting Heaven’s ends in pawn,

He must break a pathway to unknown realms “that in the earth’s
broad shadow lie enthralled.” He must assert “One faith against
a whole earth’s unbelief.”

Listening to the voice of his soul, Columbus shakes off his doubts
and looks into the future. There he sees his

lifelong enterprise

That rose like Ganges ’mid the freezing snows
Of a world’s solitude, sweep broadening down,

And, gathering to itself a thousand streams
Grow sacred ere it mingle with the sea.

The “muttering shoalbrains” on the boat around him predict dis-
aster. Return to the Old World, they demand. They will give
him but one day more. But to his aspiring spirit another day is
opportunity —

A lavish day! One day, with life and heart,

Is more than time enough to find a world.

Like Barlow in his epic vision, Lowell here stresses the theme of
a new kind of leadership, and like Freneau, he sees in Columbus a
freeman unafraid to follow a compelling purpose. In this poem the
dream-guided mariner and the young nation blundering onward
become one. With patriotic fervor Lowell refuses to accept the pos-
sibility of defeat, and concludes his questioning on a note of romantic
optimism.

Three decades later, in the eighteen seventies, two other well
known poets, Walt Whitman and Sidney Lanier, used the same sym-
bol to voice their belief in the ultimate destiny of their native land.
Lanier set forth his concept in the group of eight “Sonnets on Colum-
bus” included in his patriotic poem, “The Psalm of the West,” writ-
ten in the centennial year 1876. Like Lowell, Lanier used the story
of Columbus to “Make burn the faiths that cool, and cool the doubts
that burn.” Again the mariner stands in the night alone, heartening
his own heart — “as friend befriends his friend less brave.” What
if dawn never breaks, he questions. What if, for all his dreams, the
earth is no sphere, but “all one sickening plane?” What if the “con-

THE COLUMBUS THEME IN AMERICAN POETRY

trarious West” have no “fixed heart of Law” within it? Out of its
“wild twenty years of heavenly dreaming” his heart answers. In son-
nets five, six and seven he replies to the doubts of cowards and skep-
tics with the ringing challenge, “Hold straight into the West.”

’Ere we Gomera cleared, a coward cried,

Turn, turn: here be three caravels ahead,

From Portugal, to take us: we are dead!

Hold Westward, pilot, calmly I replied.

So when the last land down the horizon died,

Go back, go back! they prayed: our hearts are lead.
Friends, we are bound into the West, I said.

Then passed the wreck of a mast upon our side.

See (so they wept) God’s Warning! Admiral, turn!
Steersman, I said, hold straight into the West.

Then down the night we saw the meteor burn.

So do the very heavens in fire protest:

Good Admiral, put about! O dear, dear Spain!

Hold straight into the West, I said again.

The concluding sonnet of the series announces the reward of faith
— to the mariner and to the poet :

Why, look, ’tis dawn, the land is clear : ’tis done !

Two dawns do break at once from Time’s full hand —

God’s, East — mine, West: good friends, behold my Land!

Walt Whitman, in the “Prayer of Columbus,” presents the fig-
ure of the great admiral toward the close of his life, facing the dubious
outcome of his last voyage and “reporting” himself once more to the
power that has guided his journeyings. In this poem, almost a spir-
itual autobiography, Whitman identifies himself with Columbus. As
in one of his greatest poems, “Passage to India,” he looks forward to
the culmination in America of a long process of growth. The aspi-
rations of his soul and the ideals of the nation are, he believes, both
messages of truth. The aged Columbus in his prayer feels himself in
communion with the spirit which has guided him mysteriously toward
some great end, and sustained him with high dreams — dreams of
which he declares :

O I am sure they really came from Thee,

The urge, the ardor, the unconquerable will,

The potent, felt, interior command, stronger than words,

A message from the Heavens whispering to me even in sleep,
These sped me on.

THE COLUMBUS THEME IN AMERICAN POETRY

Following this “interior command,” he has tied the hemispheres
together, “the unknown to the known,” not for mere material gains,
but that some great ongoing purpose may be furthered :

Haply the brutish measureless human undergrowth I know,
Transplanted there may rise to stature, knowledge worthy Thee,
Haply the swords I know may there indeed be turned to reaping-tools,
Haply the lifeless cross I know, Europe’s dead cross, may bud and
blossom there.

His doubts die, his “dim and ever-shifting guesses — of newer bet-
ter worlds” give place to joyous triumph, and the poem ends, like
Lowell’s and Barlow’s, with a vision of the better world that is to
come when humanity rises to its true stature :

And these things I see suddenly, what mean they?

As if some miracle, some hand divine unseal’d my eyes,
Shadowy vast shapes smile through the air and sky,

And on the distant waves sail countless ships,

And anthems in new tongues I hear saluting me.

Twenty years later, Joaquin Miller, singing the vigorous songs of
pioneer adventure, voiced a buoyant American optimism in the five
stanzas of his poem entitled “Columbus.” Like Lanier, he presents
a bold explorer who faces the future undeterred by mutiny and dis-
trust, wind and storm:

Behind him lay the great Azores,

Behind the gates of Hercules;

Before him not the ghost of shores;

Before him only shoreless seas.

The good mate said: Now must we pray,

For lo ! the very stars are gone.

Brave Adm’r’l, speak; what shall I say?

Why, say: Sail on! sail on! and on!

Greatly daring he has no thought except to move forward into the
untried; and the result, Miller joyously proclaims, justifies his faith:

He gained a world; he gave that world

Its grandest lesson: On, sail on!

There is no vision of a new heaven and a new earth in this some-
what flamboyant poem with its moral tag, but idealistic nationalism
is expressed, for the writer implies that the hesitating spirit of the Old
World is to be replaced by the fearless experimentation of the New.

THE COLUMBUS THEME IN AMERICAN POETRY

The Columbus theme has found a place in the work of two widely
dissimilar modern poets — George Santayana and Vachel Lindsay.
Neither of these writers, however, makes use of his subject to acclaim
the rising glory of America. Santayana found in Columbus a symbol
of that trust in “the soul’s invincible surmise” which transcends
knowledge, but without identifying that trust with any national aspi-
rations. In a sonnet of quiet power he has expressed the faith of all
idealists :

O world, thou choosest not the better part !

It is not wisdom to be only wise,

And on the inward vision close the eyes,

But it is wisdom to believe the heart.

Columbus found a world, and had no chart,

Save one that faith deciphered in the skies;

To trust the soul’s invincible surmise
Was all his science and his only art.

Our knowledge is a torch of smoky pine
That lights the pathway but one step ahead
Across a void of mystery and dread.

Bid, then, the tender light of faith to shine
By which alone the mortal heart is led
Unto the thinking of the thought divine.

In much the same vein, but with a complete difference in tone and
melody, Vachel Lindsay paid honor to Columbus in his “Litany of the
Heroes.” This “chant about many men,” ranging from Moses to
Woodrow Wilson, celebrates the spirit of man, guided by some power
greater than itself as it moves toward an unknown destiny. Columbus
again becomes the symbol of the courageous soul that dares to venture
much by the light of inner faith :

Would that we had the fortunes of Columbus.

Sailing his caravels a trackless way,

He found a Universe — he sought Cathay.

* God give such dawns as when, his venture o’er,

The sailor looked upon San Salvador.

God lead us past the setting of the sun
To wizard islands, of august surprise;

God make our blunders wise.

These later poets see humanity groping its way onward through
the achievements of great individuals rather than through the accom-
plishments of nations. They proclaim through Columbus not a form
of government, not a new land, but the strength of an ideal deeply
ingrained in the thought of a nation.

GUAM

A Young Chamorro Farmer Comes to Visit His Uncle in a Slow-moving But Reliable Conveyance.
The Uncle Later Came to Washington, Seeking Statehood for His Island

( Courtesy Bishop Museum and Pan Pacific Press Bureau)

GUAM

Here and There, in Places Which Are Now Well Off the Road, One Finds a Substantial Stone
Bridge, Built by the Spaniards

(Courtesy Bishop Museum and Pan Pacific Press Bureau)

uam an

d tlie Ck

amorros

By E. H. Bryan, Jr.,* Honolulu, T. H.

Curator of Collections, Bishop Museum, Honolulu, T. H.

jlUAM, one of the first islands in the Pacific to be visited
by white men, and for thirty-eight years a part of the
United States, is only now being “discovered” by the peo-
ple of America. Magellan first saw Guam on March 6,
1521. The United States Navy has made it a modern community.
Now the air clippers are putting it on the map.

Most persons, not connected with the navy, are surprised to learn
that Guam is a “high” island, in contrast to the two low atolls, Mid-
way and Wake, at which the clippers also stop. They find it hard to
believe that such a little dot on the map has an area of two hundred
and twenty-five square miles, and comfortably supports a population
of 22,000. In contrast, all of the 1,400 islands which make up the
Japanese mandate in Micronesia, taken together, have only four
times this area, and four times this population, including the Japanese
settlers.

Guam is separated into two parts by a low isthmus. The north-
ern half is composed of limestone — a great section of coral reef,
fourteen miles long by four to eight miles wide, which has been pushed
up at its northern end to a height of four hundred to six hundred feet
above the sea, from which it slopes gradually down nearly to sea level
at the south. Most of this rolling plateau faces the sea in a continu-
ous line of cliffs. Only here and there is there a little pocket of
coastal plain, whose sandy beach is flanked by groves of coconut palms
and other tropical shore vegetation. Behind this, in turn, is the steep,
forested slope.

This limestone plateau, both in the interior, where it has been
weathered to a rich soil, and along the tops of the cliffs, where the

*E. H. Bryan, Jr., is curator of collections at the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum
at Honolulu. He went to Guam in March, 1936, at the invitation of Gov. G. A. Alex-
ander to help reorganize the Guam Museum. During his six weeks’ stay on the island,
Mr. Bryan visited all parts of the island collecting natural history specimens. The article
is the result of his personal observations and research.

GUAM AND THE CHAMORROS

surface is still solid and jagged, is covered with a luxuriant, moist
forest. Picture to yourself a thick stand of tall, tropical trees. Here
and there giant, widespreading banyans, and tall, slender breadfruits
rise above the general level, their branches festooned with epiphytic
ferns and mosses. Beneath is a nearly continuous tangle of shrubs
and ferns, cycads and pandanus, vines and lianas. The only open
spaces have been laboriously cleared by ranchers. In these are planted
corn, sweet potatoes, fruit trees and truck gardens. On the east coast,
toward the north, stands a single grassy hill, Mt. Santa Rosa, the eight
hundred and sixty foot remains of an old volcanic dome.

The southern half of the island consists of a range of hills of
volcanic origin, bordered on both sides by southern extensions of the
raised limestone. The crest of this line of hills lies about two miles
inland from the west coast. The peaks average about a thousand to
1,200 feet in height. The highest point, Mt. Lamlam, or “lightning
mountain,” reaches an elevation of 1,334 feet. The western slope is
quite steep, arising either from a narrow coastal plain or directly
from the sea. The eastern slope is broader and more gradual, and is
cut by a series of valleys and gulches, carved out by sizable streams,
which flow to the east coast.

This volcanic material is not fresh basaltic rock, such as composes
much of the mountain mass of Hawaii. It is more like tuff or solidi-
fied layers of volcanic mud or ash. The surface of this has weathered
to a heavy clay which becomes very slippery during the rainy months.

In direct contrast to the luxuriant forests which cover the lime-
stone areas, this heavy clay soil supports only a growth of swordgrass
and low, weedy vegetation, correctly called “savanna” in Guam. The
moist valley bottoms may contain trees and shrubs, but the ridges are
always grassy. One thinks one has found an exception to this rule,
when one sees the crest of the hills in the vicinity of Mt. Alifan, near
the center of the range, covered with forest. Closer examination dis-
closes that these hills are covered with a mantle of limestone. How
this got there requires considerable geologic explanation, including the
relative movement of land and sea of nearly a thousand feet, but it
accounts for the presence of the forest.

The entire eastern shore line, as far south as Inarajan (pronounced
In-a-rah-han) is composed of limestone, raised in places to a height
of several hundred feet. The limestone is also disclosed well up the

GUAM AND THE CHAMORROS

river valleys, giving rise to such strange features as natural bridges
and streams which flow underground. It supports a dense forest.
Around the southern end and up the west side it becomes a narrow
fringing reef. Off the south end is Cocos Islet, a sandpile covered
with coconut palms, connected to east and west by narrow ribbons of
reef, which enclose a shallow lagoon. There is said to be fine fishing
off this reef.

On the west side, a peninsula of raised limestone, the Orote Penin-
sula, extends westward about three miles from the curve of the shore.
Low at its landward end, it slopes gradually upward as one goes west,
until at the point it rises two hundred feet sheer from the sea. Some-
what parallel to it, to the north, lies Cabras Island, a narrow ridge of
raised reef, which is continued westward in a line of reefs and shoals.
Between these two lies Apra Harbor, the chief port of the island. It
is here that the clipper planes alight.

Guam is located at the southern end of the Marianas Islands, near
the end of a great chain of submarine mountains, extending southward
from Japan. It is 1,350 miles south of Yokohama, 1,500 miles east
of Manila, and 3,337 miles west and a little south of Honolulu.
Around it on three sides are islands of the Japanese mandate, the
nearest one, Rota, visible on clear days from the northern points,
thirty miles away.

Lying in latitude thirteen and one-half degrees north, Guam is
well within the torrid zone. Its climate is warm and humid, but
modified to some extent by the trade winds. The average tempera-
ture throughout the year is eighty-one degrees Fahrenheit, from which
it varies but little each day. The rainfall at Agana averages slightly
under ninety inches a year. More than half falls between June and
October. The hills are not high enough to cause much difference
throughout the island. The northern end is perhaps a little wetter,
the southern end certainly a little drier.

The climate may be a little enervating to those coming from a
cooler region, but it is not unhealthful. The primitive Chamorros,
before the coming of foreign civilization, were as healthy a people as
could be found anywhere. The only hazards are occasional tropical
cyclones and earthquakes. The cyclones have their point of origin a
few hundred miles to the southeast, in the Caroline group, and for
the most part sweep over the area between Guam and the Philippines.

GUAM AND THE CHAMORROS

Once in a while one turns too sharp a corner, and removes a few
thatched roofs or fells a few trees in Guam. Approximately eighty
earthquakes are recorded each year on the seismograph, located at
Agana. Occasionally one occurs which is strong enough to break
dishes and shake down stone walls or poorly constructed houses, such
as last October and November. But nobody seems to worry about
these matters in Guam.

This is the environment in which live about 20,000 descendants of
the native Chamorros, and about 2,000 other inhabitants.

When Magellan sailed into Umatac Bay, on March 6, 1521, he
discovered the island to be inhabited by a tall, robust, fine-looking
people, free from disease and physical defects. They wore but few
clothes, and their light brown skins were not even tattooed. The
explorers marvelled at their ability in or on the water. Never had
they seen such expert swimmers; and the canoes were described as
seeming to fly over the surface of the sea.

This generous people willingly gave food and water to the sailors,
who were sick and starving after nearly four months on the open
ocean, with foul water and wormy food. But when they desired to
come on board the ships of Magellan’s little fleet and take some of
the strange new objects which they saw, they were cruelly rebuffed and
termed “ladrones” (thieves) by the Spanish and Portuguese seamen,
a name which stuck to the group of islands for many years.

Magellan’s records do not tell us very much concerning these
Chamorros of the sixteenth century. But by piecing together all of
the accounts given by the many navigators who visited the islands, we
can get some idea of the people and their culture.

There seem to have been two quite different types of people liv-
ing on Guam. One of these was of Indo-Malay origin. Like the
Polynesians, they probably originated as a Caucasian stock in south-
eastern Asia. These inter-mixed with Mongoloid people of the
Malay Archipelago as they moved eastward. Associated with them
in Guam was an inferior caste of small, wiry people of negroid origin,
with kinky black hair. Whether these were the inhabitants of Guam
before the coming of the lighter group, or whether they were con-
quered and brought along from Melanesian islands to the south, we
cannot tell. While not slaves, these people were hopeless outcasts,
unable to become independent farmers or artisans, and subject to all

GUAM MUSEUM

A Row of Three Latte Monuments, Which Centuries Ago Marked the Grave of Some Famous
Chamorro in Another Part of the Island

( Courtesy Bishop Museum, and Pan Pacific Press Bureau)

GUAM

From the Cable Station on Orote Peninsula, One Looks Eastward Across Apra Harbor Toward a
Line of Grassy-sloped Volcanic Hills

(Courtesy Bishop Museum and Pan Pacific Press Bureau)

GUAM AND THE CHAMORROS

sorts of prohibitions. For them to associate, or worse yet to inter-
marry, with the people of the other group meant death.

The Indo-Malay stock were in turn divided into two social groups
or castes, Matao and Achote. The Mataos sat on the council, led in
battle, might become priests, monopolized house-building and weapon-
making, and enjoyed great liberty and independence. The Achotes
were degraded Mataos. They had no place on the council, their
crafts consisted in making tools, clothing and ornaments, and they
made up the ranks of the fighters in battle. The degradation of the
Achotes entailed loss of prestige rather than material loss, and they
intermingled freely with the upper caste.

There was a rather loose form of governmental organization. It
consisted of an association of families, led by a council of nobles, but
without any definite king. The oldest member of the most powerful
family usually dominated the council. Women held an important
place in the social order, perhaps in part because property did not
pass from father to son, but to a sister’s children.

Marriage was an important affair, with early contract and elabo-
rate ceremony. Polyandry was permitted, but seldom practiced. Mar-
riage was prohibited between blood relatives. Divorce was frequent,
sometimes on small cause. Children accompanied their mother.
Bachelors occupied a separate “great house,” as in Melanesia. They
lived in concubinage with girls hired or purchased from their parents,
usually from another village. This did not affect later marriage in
the least. Women with healthy children were much sought after as
wives.

Rival groups engaged in battle on slight provocation. This
resulted in much noise, but generally little bloodshed. Their weapons
consisted of light spears, eight to ten feet long, tipped with bone or
hard wood; crude clubs; and well-shaped sling stones, which could
be projected with great force and accuracy from fiber slings. The bat-
tle usually consisted of the assembling of the opposing forces, much
boasting and shouting of challenges, and the interchange of a few
volleys of stones. When a few persons on one side had been hit, that
side gave up, and submitted to the taunts and sarcastic songs of the
victors.

The Chamorros were an amiable, carefree people, fond of sports,
games, dancing and story telling. They especially enjoyed tricks,

GUAM AND THE CHAMORROS

jests, mimicry, and ridicule. Dances were accompanied by songs, and
by music on reed flutes and the stringed balumbautujan, a one-stringed
bow, with coconut shell resonator, which was placed on the player’s
chest. Chamorro music was considered “harsh and discordant” by
the early European explorers.

Food consisted of taro, bananas, yams, cycas nuts (called
“fadang”), coconuts, breadfruits, sugar cane, fish and, as a special
delicacy at feasts, rice, which was of aboriginal introduction. Corn
and sweet potatoes, which are now an important part of the Chamorro
diet, were introduced from Mexico by the Spanish galleons. Fowls and
wild birds, which abounded in the forests, were seldom eaten. If pigs
occurred at all prior to the coming of white men, they were probably
not a part of the diet. Cooking was done in pit ovens, removed
from dwellings. Some food was dried in the sun. There were no
intoxicants and no awa drinking; but betel was chewed.

Houses were raised off the ground. They were neatly made with
a wooden framework and a thatch of coconut or nepa palm leaves.
Furnishings consisted of mats, rice baskets, and betel boxes, plaited
from pandanus leaves. Pots were made of clay, mortars of stone,
and water vessels of bamboo joints. The Chamorros seemed not to
have been expert wood carvers, although they made remarkably fine
outrigger canoes with dug-out hull, built-up sides and equipped with
mast and lateen sail of pandanus mat.

Most of the early religious beliefs of the Chamorros have been
lost. The reason for this was mainly that the outsiders who first
made contact with the people were so occupied with the task of impart-
ing to them a new religion that they paid little attention to, or con-
demned, any older beliefs. There were various sorts of gods, mainly
associated with good and bad spirits of departed ancestors. The peo-
ple were very superstitious, and lived in such fear of the “tatamona,”
or spooks which lurked in the forests, that they would not remain
there at night. This is one reason why farmers, even today, do not
live on their ranches, but congregate in the few villages.

In the very early days the important persons, after death, were
buried between rows of upright stones, topped by huge coral-head
capitals. The builders of these “latte” monuments, however, had
become forgotten in 1521.

Nearly one hundred and fifty years after its discovery by Magel-
lan, Guam was settled by Spanish Jesuit missionaries, a mission hav-

GUAM AND THE CHAMORROS

ing been established by Padre Sanvitores, June 1 6, 1668. The
Chamorros did not take kindly to either the Spanish rule or the efforts
to make them Christians. During the century of struggle which
ensued, most of the Chamorro men were killed off. Spanish, Filipino,
Mexican and other immigrants intermarried with the women, until
the racial stock has become a hybrid. More than two hundred years
of intermarriage with foreigners have greatly diluted the Chamorro
blood, but not their racial culture. Language and teachings were
handed down by the mothers, so that today the Chamorro language,
containing many foreign words, it is true, but dominantly Chamorro,
is generally spoken.

By the end of the nineteenth century the Chamorro population
had been reduced to less than 10,000 in number, with almost none of
pure blood. The United States took over the islands on July 21,
1898. At present the native population numbers about 20,000 and
is on the increase. Health conditions, under the United States Navy,
have greatly improved. A staff of one hundred and thirty-six admin-
isters free hospitals, with corps men on duty in all the fifteen dis-
tricts. There are now some thirty-six schools with one hundred and
fifty native teachers. Education is carried on in English, through the
high school. There is also an agricultural school, which aims to turn
out better farmers of the younger generation, as well as to help adult
farmers by extension work.

Communication service includes naval radio and Commercial
Pacific cable which bring daily news ; an average of a boat a month ;
and now weekly clipper service, each way, which bring Guam within
four days of San Francisco and one day of Manila.

The government is administered by U. S. Navy personnel, with
the advice of a Guam “Congress” made up of sixteen councilors and
twenty-seven assemblymen, who are elected by the people of the
various districts for a term of two years. The district commissioners
and many of the governmental personnel are also native Chamorros.

The Navy Department, through employing about a thousand
natives, and utilizing the produce of a thousand more, is the chief
source of revenue for the island. On the whole, the naval governor
and his associates are furnishing a high grade, and certainly an effi-
cient, brand of government for Guam. A few mistakes may have
been made, and a few injustices done in the past, but with such officials

GUAM AND THE CHAMORROS

as those at present stationed in Guam, the Chamorros could scarcely
be better governed.

Some of the Chamorros desire self-government. A delegation of
two has recently gone to Washington to advocate this matter. It is
the opinion of the writer, an opinion which is generally shared by
those who have the welfare of Guam and the Chamorros at heart,
that should the naval government be withdrawn, so much of the
island’s income would also go that it is doubtful if, under the present
economic conditions, a satisfactory government and proper standard
of living could be maintained by the people of Guam.

Letters By Will lam Cullen Bryant

By Charles I. Glicksberg, Ph. D., Newark, N. J.

the “United States Literary Gazette” merged with
“New-York Review, and Atheneum Magazine,”
nt took charge of the New York editorial office,
ious to the merger, he had been co-editor of the “New-
York Review, and Atheneum Magazine.” The separation of the
two offices, one in New York and one in Boston, made necessary a
steady correspondence between the two editors. In these letters prob-
lems of management were discussed in detail : the proportion of space
to be filled, the value of various contributions submitted, payment to
contributors, books to be reviewed, the choice of capable reviewers,
typographical arrangement, and so on.1 The new magazine was
given the title of the “United States Review and Literary Gazette.”
After the appearance of the July, 1826, issue, the Boston editor, Mr.
Carter, was replaced by Charles Folsom.

The series of letters Bryant wrote cover a period from January
8, 1826, to August 13, 1827. They are of considerable value, not
only as revealing the conditions that confronted an editor of a maga-
zine at that time, but also in helping us definitely to identify many
of his writings and in making clear his opinions and comments on
matters of literary interest.2 While a number of these letters are of
a routine character, occasions arose when fundamental issues had to
be faced and solved. The affairs of the magazine were evidently not
prospering. Both editors were endeavoring to the best of their
ability to reduce expenses and to increase the number of subscribers
by producing a magazine with timely, attractive material by compe-
tent contributors. They did not always agree on questions of policy,
and divided responsibility made efficient management extremely dif-
ficult. As far as possible Bryant sought to be reasonable, patient, con-

1. Many of the problems connected with the management of this magazine are taken
up fully in the article by the present writer, “Bryant and the ‘United States Review,’ ”
“The New England Quarterly,” VII (December, 1934), 687-701.

2. The original manuscripts of the letters printed below are to be found in the Boston
Public Library.

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

ciliatory, but he refused to compromise his judgment or repudiate his
word once it was given. He wished to maintain consistently high lit-
erary standards. He was opposed to injecting political bad blood into
the pages of the magazine. These letters permit us to see a phase of
Bryant’s personality not expressed in the poetry he composed at that
time: he is practical, sagacious, and prudent; he is making his way
in the social and literary life of New York; he is able to solicit contri-
butions and gain support; he carries out the complex duties of his
position conscientiously and well.

New York Jan 8 1826

Dear Sir

I send you notices of Mitchell’s Discourse & the Essay on Bor-
ing for Water and some poetical contributions.3 4 I intended to have
sent a poem of my own but I delayed it till an Influenza or something
of the kind stupefied me and I could not concoct any thing poetical.
As a substitute which you will be glad to see I send you another poem
of Mr. Halleck’s entitled “Wyoming.” If you have time enough, he
would like to see the proof-sheet as before. — By the bye there was an
error in the poem called Niagara in the last No. — feelingly for
feebly. A

Tor Hill I wish to notice myself as I am going to read it.5

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

P. S. Don’t print what I have marked out with red ink.

New York March 1 1826

Dear Sir

I enclose you an article on Halleck’s poems for your next — and a
Review of the Life of Lindley Murray written by Miss E. Robbins,
together with two pieces of poetry sent me by Mr. Wigglesworth.
Miss Robbins will expect to be paid for what she writes. There is

3. Bryant reviewed “A Discourse on the Character and Services of Thomas Jeffer-
son,” by Samuel L. Mitchell (New York, 1826), in the “United States Review and Lit-
erary Gazette,” I (February, 1827), 385. He also reviewed “An Essay on the Art of
Boring the Earth for the Obtainment of a Spontaneous Flow of Water” (New Bruns-
wick, 1826), in the “United States Review and Literary Gazette,” I (March, 1827),
461-62. See “New Contributions by William Cullen Bryant” in “Americana,” XXX
(October, 1936), spon.

4. This poem is, in part, Bryant’s translation of Heredia’s ode to Niagara.

5. For a critical analysis of the reviews and notices Bryant contributed to this maga-
zine, see “New Contributions by William Cullen Bryant,” “Americana,” XXX (Octo-
ber, 1936), 573-92.

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

also an article for the Miscellaneous Department about the Fine Arts
in the age of Charles 5th. The writer brought it to me with some
pieces of poetry. I was obliged to reject the poetry, and to alleviate
the matter as well as I could I told him I would send on to you the
prose article for insertion in case you thought it worthy. Do as you
think proper with it. The author did not give his name but spoke of
Morse the painter as his particular friend &c. which is something in any
man’s favor; and he requested that if you thought the article worthy of
insertion 6 copies of the No. containing it might be sent to New

Haven directed to the signature n C. and the money should

be remitted. I hope you will see this part of the request attended to,
if the article is admitted. As to the books Honor O’Hara, Last of
the Lairds, Hosack’s Address, The Young Rifleman & Bull on Fuel
which Mr. Wigglesworth wrote me about I give them up to your writ-
ing with pleasure. Yet do not forget that Bull is said to have slan-
dered the Rhode-Island Coal and Dr. Hosack the Eastern Medical
College, and that a prosecution is actually pending against the latter
gentleman. Bull is Secretary of the Lehigh Company.— As for Rome
in the 19 Cent. & Almacks I have articles promised on those sub-
jects. I shall send next week some verses of my own and several
Critical Notices, and a big letter to yourself about many things.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

III

CUMMINGTON Sept. 1 4 I 826

My dear Sir

I did not get your letter of the eighth until last evening. I had
previously sent on an article from the Miscellany and some lines from
the Spanish. I wish you to make a correction in the title of the latter.
Instead of “To Mary Magdalen’’ — let it be “Mary Magdalen” —
otherwise I am afraid that those who are not well versed in Scripture
History on reading the title may expect a copy of amatory verses
addressed to some Mary or other.

I send you a Critical Notice and some more poetry for the Oct.
No. I supposed that I had already contributed my proportion to the
Sept. No. and that the account of the N Y Lyceum would go into the
Oct. No.6 As it seems this has not been convenient I fear my con-
tributions for this No. will not amount to my 20 pages. If I could
get at new books I could soon dish up Critical Notices enough to make
up the quantity but in my situation it is not easy to get at these. I
told Mr. Carvill to send me the new publications that appeared in

6. The article on “The New York Lyceum” appeared in the “United States Review
and Literary Gazette,” I (October, 1826), 55. See “Americana,” XXX (October, 1936),

S89.

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

N. Y. or at least such as could be conveniently sent, but I have as yet
received nothing. I hope therefore that if there should be any
deficiency in furnishing my quota while here in the country you will
let me make it up as soon as I am returned to town, where I shall
probably be in 3 weeks. I shall let you know when I go.

I have not yet received the Sept. No. which I suppose is published
before this time. The August No. was I am told very well received in
New York, and if we do nothing to lose the public favour in that quar-
ter I think it stands on at least as good ground there as the N. Y.
Review did.

As for Gaston de Bondeville I intended to have made an article
about that novel and the other pieces published with it — but I cannot
lay my hands on them. You may as well take it before it is stale.
Vivian Gray and the Highlander you are welcome to.

I think we spoke of the alteration you mention in the mode of
printing the work — viz to put running titles in Italics over the several
articles — and I agreed to it. We also spoke of putting the Miscel-
lany and Critical Notices into the same type with the Review. What
do you think of this alteration? These articles are not more easy to
write than the Reviews and are perhaps of as much consequence.
Putting them into smaller type seems, however, to imply that one of
these two things is the case. Besides ought not he who furnishes a
critical notice to be paid as liberally as he who furnishes a Review.
I mention these things for the consideration of yourself and Mr.
Wigglesworth — if you make the changes I shall think it well — if not
I do not regard it as very important.

I believe there was some understanding between us, or at least
between myself and the gentleman who conducted the Lit. Gaz.
respecting the books to be reviewed similar to what you mention.7

I am obliged to you for the further light you give me on the Ode
of Villegas. I mistook the sense entirely and mean some time or
other to correct the translation. In the mean time the original has
exercised the critical ingenuity of others besides yourself. You
recollect we vainly tried to find the word hicella in the dictionary. A
friend of mine in New York writes me that he is told by Cubi that it
is an obsolete word, signifying “favour, complexion” &c.

I have just received a letter from Mrs. Simmons in which she
solicits the immediate remittance of the money for the two letters of
Mr. Simmons. I wish she had it, I have no doubt that she is in dis-
tress. Cannot the type be set up the number of pages ascertained and
the money be sent on without delay? I left with Mr. Carter the letter

7. It had originally been decided that the Boston editor would review all books pub-
lished in Boston, while Bryant took care of all books issued in New York. See “The
New England Quarterly,” VII (December, 1934), 691.

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

from her to me containing the address. If you should not find it her
address is Mrs. Eliza Simmons, care of John Vaughan Corner of
Front & Walnut Streets.

My compliments to Mrs. Folsom & believe me
Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant.

I hope to be informed of the names of the writers of the articles in
the Journal as they appear, and shall make a point of letting you
know by whom the articles that I send are written.

New York Oct. 13, 1826

Dear Sir

I enclose you a Review of Cary & Lea’s Atlantic Souvenir,8 a
notice of Segur’s Four Ages,9 a Letter from Dupin a French Jurist
handed me by Mr. Sampson, and an article on Brooks poem by a Mr.
Lawson who wishes to remain anonymous.

With the latter article you may perceive I have taken some liber-
ties— but I am not certain that it is yet exactly what it ought to be.
Mr. Brooks has really written a good poem and deserves to be praised
for it — but I do not know what you may think of the degree of appro-
bation bestowed upon it. The article may also need some further
corrections in the diction. — Will you look over it and make such
further amendments and omissions as my haste has not permitted
me to make. —

For the next number I shall probably have an article on South’s
History of New York another on Alexander’s Canon of the Scrip-
tures, another on Torrey’s Compendium of the Flora of the Northern
& Middle States, and I do not know what else.

There was no copy of the last No. sent to me with those directed
to the Carvills — so I got one of his. Should there not be a few num-
bers sent on to me every month in order that I might make such a use
of them as I may judge best for the interest of the work? Do you
distribute no numbers gratuitously from Boston ?

The Rev. R. R. Gurley Secretary of the Colonization Society,
and Editor of the “African Repository” has sent his work to me
desiring to exchange with the U. S. Review — and I am desirous that
it should be done. I believe that the owners of the Literary Gazette
exchanged with the several periodical works — but I do not remember
that any arrangement was made for doing the same thing with the

8. The “United States Review and Literary Gazette,” I (November, 1826), 145.

9. A review of “The Four Ages of Life,” translated from the French of the Count
de Segur, appeared in the “United States Review and Literary Gazette,” I (December,
1826), 223-25.

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

U. S. Review. Will you be good enough to mention this subject to
the other proprietors & write me about it? It is not a pleasant situa-
tion to be the editor & one of the proprietors of a public journal and
yet not have a copy of it to dispose of.

Some time since I received a letter from Mr. Abel Patten who
writes by order of the “Society of Social Friends” Dartmouth Col-
lege sending six dollars and requesting me to send them the New
York Review. I wrote him explaining the change that had taken
place in the journal, adding that if his Society were already subscrib-
ing for the U. S. Lit. Gaz. or did not choose to take the new work
I would return the money provided they gave me notice within a rea-
sonable time. I have heard nothing from them since. It will be most
convenient for them to receive the work from Boston, & for me to
keep the money as a fund for the payment of postage — Will you
request the agents to put them down as subscribers — credit them with
the money and charge it to my account ?

What is become of the “Wallet”?

The i st No of the New York Review arrived to-day. It seems to
take very well. The mechanical execution delighted every body.

My compliments to Mrs. Folsom & believe me
Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

New York Oct 29 1826

My Dear Sir

I write to you at this time principally to say that I have put Mr.
“Strickland’s Reports” into the hands of Mr. Renwick who will pre-
pare an article for the Dec. No. and that I shall also have a notice of
the Rifleman and another of a “Spanish Tale by Dr. Sanuza” of this
city — I forget the name of the Tale.

The Review has been well received here, and the subscription list
is going on well in the city although some of the country subscribers
are taking advantage of the gap in the work to have an apology for
returning their number. I am very much delighted with the typo-
graphical arrangement and execution and hear it spoken of in terms
of admiration by every body.

I shall send on the matter shortly for the Dec. No. and hope it
will reach you by the tenth.

The poem of B. L. Argensola from which I made my translation
I found in Bouterwick’s History of Spanish & Portuguese Literature
a work which contains a great deal of poetry in these languages,
placed in the notes and serving as a series of illustrations to the text.
The publication in which I found it is a translation from the German

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

published at London in two volumes a few years since. If I could
come at it I would send you the original of the lines.

Our contributor Cushing it seems is in some difficulty — I suppose it
is he. I do not however think the evidence arising from comparison
of hands conclusive, and I should be satisfied with his denial. Mr.
Verplanck once handed me an article for the New York Review writ-
ten by one of his friends the hand writing of which so nearly resembled
his own that I could almost have sworn to it.

I fear that three pages of practical intelligence every month might
be deemed a pretty large proportion — I do not know however that I
should be for excluding a contribution of that sort provided it seemed
likely to be interesting to the public.

In haste Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

Dear Sir New York Nov 5 1826

I return the poetry you sent me altered for the press, except for
the “fragment” which will not do. Do you want it again? I am not
for receiving the poetry of Mr. Mellen on the terms he expects — we
cannot afford it — and I think this was understood by us all when I
saw you last. He can possibly make a better bargain elsewhere. Nor
should I think the piece itself worthy of insertion unless altered.

I send you also a review of the “Young Rifleman.”10 I shall have
Mr. Renwick’s Review of Strickland this week, or Friday at latest —
a notice of Alexanders Canons by Mr. Ware and a Review of some
work on Banking by Mr. Coleman jr. who is a great Political Econo-
mist author. [?]

I am Sir yrs in haste

W. C. Bryant

If you have not the Young Rifleman let me know it & I will send
you the book or the leaves from it, containing the extracts —

VII

Dear Sir

I meant to have sent you by Mr. Gray a Review [of] the life
of E D Clarke the traveller but I am unable to find it in season. I
shall send it by Friday’s boat. It will [make] io or twelve pages so
that you may calculate upon me for that amount for the Review part.11
Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant12

10. The review of the novel, “Adventures of a Young Rifleman,” appeared in the
“United States Review and Literary Gazette,” I (December, 1826), 178-90.

11. A review of “The Life and Remains of Daniel Clarke” appeared in the “United
States Review and Literary Gazette,” II, (May, 1827), 109-23.

12. This letter is without a date. It may possibly belong to the year 1827. A few
words are partly rubbed out and illegible.

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

VIII

Dear Sir

I send you an article for the next No. a review of Hope Leslie.
It was written by Miss E. Robbins by whom Mr. H. D. Sedgwick was
desirous that the work should be reviewed. I also enclose a piece of
poetry which I have looked over. If there is any thing in the review
that does not suit you we have a carte blanche to expunge or alter any
exceptionable passage.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

New York Nov. 9, 1826

My Dear Sir

I received at nearly the same moment your last letter and Pro-
fessor Renwick’s Review of Strickland’s Reports; I saw with some
alarm that you had on hand a critical notice of Strickland’s Reports
— as the article furnished by Renwick is a very good one and contains
matter which we cannot well spare. I have sent it on however and
hope that it will be printed in some form or other. Could not the
critical notice of Mr. Treadwell be incorporated into it? The work
of Strickland is one of no small importance, and is got up at an expense
quite unusual in this country. It seems to be deserving of more notice
than could be taken of it in a page or two. Or if this plan will not
answer could not Mr. R’s article be provided with a new title and
placed in the Miscellaneous department? One of these things, I
should imagine, might easily be done.

I send you also an article on Alexanders “Canon of the Scrip-
tures” by Mr. William Ware and another on “Thoughts on Banking”
by Mr. W. H. Coleman. The latter has been examined by some of
our most erudite political economists here, and as they approve of it
I think it extremely safe to publish it, more especially as Mr. Coleman
has studied very carefully and for a considerable time the subjects on
which he has touched and has the reputation of understanding them
very well. He desires however to be kept anonymous, as there are
some brokers of his acquaintance of a different opinion from himself
and being ill, does not want to have any controversy.

You have shortened somewhat the time allowed me to get my
articles to Boston but as you have only given me information of it
since the month came in you must excuse me for not obeying you this
time. I will endeavor to do it hereafter.

Mr. Renwick Mr. Ware & Mr. Coleman are men who write for
pay. The first and last of these articles, I hope you will contrive to
put at all events into the next number as I promised the writers it

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

should be done, and my promise was made before you informed me
that the first of the month was not soon enough.

In respect to Mr. G. Mellen’s poetry we are quite agreed. Our
concern is too poor to buy much poetry; and I dare say that Mr. Mel-
len will make more by writing prize poems than he could by writing
poetry for us at the rate we can afford to pay. I have handed to Mr.
Helleck the author of “Fanny” & of “Croaker” a copy of the first
and second number; and unless he disappoints me much I shall have
from him something for the next No. He is exceedingly popular here
— more so than you can well imagine — and a little assistance from
him would help the work exceedingly.

“Sandoval,” “Boyne Water,” & the “other novel” you are wel-
come to. I have not read them, and do not intend to do it, nor am I
certain that I can get any body to notice them. For your next I shall
have an article on Jicotenal a Mexican Tale by a Spaniard of this
city13 — another on a translation of “Las Partidas” or the code of
Spanish Law lately published in Louisiana with such other matters
as it may please fortune to send in my way.

As for Mrs. Hemans have you forgotten my telling you that Mr.
Bancroft of Northampton requested of me some time since while I
was editor of the N. Y. Review the privilege of reviewing that work
when it appeared, and that I promised it to him? And do you not
recollect that I desired, that if you had no objection, he might be per-
mitted to do it — and that you agreed to it? I cannot, to be sure,
recollect quite so well as Mrs. Quickly, in another case, whether you
were at that time sitting by a sea-coal fire or not, nor what dish you
were eating, nor whether it was Wednesday, nor who came into the
room nor what the person who came into the room said; but I recol-
lect the substance of the conversation very well which is as much as is
necessary, and I have no doubt that you do also on being reminded
of it. I spoke to Mr. Bancroft about it afterwards and I suppose he
expects to do it. Whatever may be thought of Mr. Bancroft’s poetical
talent, of which there are some specimens in Cary & Lea’s Souvenir of
this year, he shows no want of ability in prose.

Make what you please of the article on Brooks’s poem. I will
give you in my next, what you desire, an abstract of my opinions on
the U. S. Review & Literary Gazette and its several articles.

My compliments to Mrs. Folsom & believe me

Yrs trul5' W. C. Bryant

I observe that copies of the U. S. Review are sent hither to sev-
eral editors of Newspapers who publish the contents of the numbers
as a kind of equivalent. These are the “Statesman,” the “National

13. See “Americana,” XXX (October, 1936), 581-83.

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

Advocate and the “Daily Advertiser.” Of these the two former
have a small circulation, and neither of the three ever have noticed or
ever would notice the work in any other way than by performing the
bargain that is by publishing a list of the contents. There are other
papers whose opinions on subjects of literature are somewhat more
likely to be right, who have a larger circulation & whose editors
are either my personal friends or acquainted with me & well dis-
posed towards me. These, such as the Editor, of the “N. Y.
American,” the “Commercial Advertiser,” the “Enquirer” as it is
now conducted, the “Times” &c. do not receive the work — yet they
are friendly to it — and all noticed the union of the two journals in
the kindest terms.

New York Dec 8, 1826

My Dear Sir

I send you two Critical Notices with Dr. Lindsley’s pamphlet. I
have also enclosed a good deal of poetry — more perhaps than can be
printed in the next No. The articles sent me by Mr. Wigglesworth I
do not return because I have not had time to examine and correct
them.

The poem on Burns is by Halleck the author of Fanny and is alto-
gether [the] noblest monument that has been erected to the memory
of him whom it celebrates. It is the tribute of one great poet to the
genius of another. You will oblige me by giving it the first place
among the poetry of the January number. It will have a great run
here, as everything written by Halleck is sought and read with the
greatest eagerness. Halleck of all the literary men of the age except
the author of the Waverly novels is the most universal favorite with
the New York public. The poem entitled My Native Village is by
a brother of mine — that entitled “A Changeful Picture” is anony-
mous. The translation from Heredia is not wholly made by myself
and therefore I have not felt justified in putting my signature to it.
It seems to me that the poetry of Heredia is the best which has been
written about the Great American Cataract.

Mr. Halleck is fond of having his poetry handsomely, and cor-
rectly printed, and as he was not to see the proof sheet he showed
some anxiety on the subject. I tranquillised him by referring to your
well-known care and accuracy, and promised in your name that his
poem should have all the advantages which typographical arrange-
ment correct arthography and careful punctuation could give it. I hope
you will not disclaim my authority to make such a promise.

I am in hopes of getting up a kind of association of literary gen-
tlemen here each of whom will contribute yearly a certain proportion
— a small one — to the contents of our journal — Mr. Verplanck sug-

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

gested it, the other day and offered to be one of them — provided 7 or
8 others could be induced to engage in it.

I would write about some further matters as I promised to do in
my last — but the boat would be off before I could finish my letter.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

P. S. I see nothing of the Review of Brooks’s poem — I fear his
friends will grow impatient.

New York Jan 1, 1827

Dear Sir

I sent you a Review of the Catalogue of the Exhibition of the
National Academy of Design. I send at present part of it only but
you will receive the rest in 3 or 4 days at farthest, as the gentleman
who is writing it only retains the last sheets in his hands to make a
few additions & alterations. It may make 16 or 17 pages. I wish
you would give it as conspicuous a place in the Review as possible as it
is a subject quite interesting to us in New York and somewhat so to
other cities.

I have been so ill lately as to be unable to write myself but you
shall have a notice of the Prairies next week. I am out of poetry. If
you have any I want it.

Coopers pamphlet on the Constitution relates to a question that
divides the two parties of the U. S. I should think it had better not
be meddled with at least as respects that question. If Mr. Everett
reviews Clay’s speeches I hope he will also steer clear of that question
— since it is made a party question — and that he will not get in any of
his new fashioned notions on political economy.

I think Verplanck will be persuaded to review Cooper’s Political
Economy but I will let you know next week. If he will not I think
Porter will do it well.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

XII

Dear Sir

I shall send a notice of the Prairie,14 & by and by something about
Keppels Travels. The rest of the books mentioned in Mr. Wiggles-
worth’s letters I am willing to leave to you.

There are several works published your way which you do not
seize upon. Some of them . . . . 15 Johnston’s Narrative, Porter’s
Analysis, Miss Bowdlin Rambles in Germany &c. &c. &c. — What do
you mean to do with all these?

14. See the “United States Review and Literary Gazette,” II (July, 1827), 306-08.

15. Two or three words are badly scribbled at this point and cannot be deciphered.

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

I sent 3 months ago a review of Lindley Murray’s Life. I
have not heard of it since. I sent also in some of the last days of
last April a review of Mercier’s Discourse on Education as a part of
my contribution for the June No.16 Will you inform me whether you
have received it?

The enclosed is the rest of Mr. Morse’s article on the Exhibition
— Mr. S. F. B. Morse the painter & president of the National Acad-
emy.— He is to be kept anonymous. It is of the utmost importance
that the article should appear in the July No. If the whole cannot be
got in it may be printed.17 I shall write again this week.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

Mr. Folsom XIII

Dear Sir

The above lines are by Sands. I sent you the beginning of this
week an article by Mr. Morse who is to be kept anonymous. I
wish that that article should be considered as a part of my contri-
bution for the July No. so far as is necessary but if what I have
sent exceeds my 20 pages I wish that for the surplus he may be paid
by the proprietors. The rest I shall advance myself. I have been
somewhat out of health and unable to write till lately. I have for that
reason sent no [?] verses of my own. — Ianthe is Miss Manley — an
old correspondent of the U. S. Lit. Gaz.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

I shall review Millers Letters on Clerical Habits18 —

XIV

Dear Sir

I believe that you may as well get a review of the Life of Napo-
leon in your quarter. Dr. Anderson has called to tell me that he
could not make an article on Everett’s America that would not lose us
150 subscribers in Boston. The work is exclusively unpopular here.
It is a political work as it seems to me, and if it were laid on the same
shelf with Cooper’s pamphlet on the Constitution no harm would
be done I think. Verplanck has talked about an article on Coopers
Political Economy, but he is lazy and I believe will never do it. Sup-
pose you give the book to Porter.

16. The review of Charles Fenlon Mercier’s “A Discourse on Popular Education”
appeared in the July, 1827, issue.

1 7. That is how the sentence reads in the original. Did Bryant mean that it could
be printed in part? Two words may possibly have been omitted in the haste of writing.

18. At the bottom of this letter appears a note scrawled by Edward Wigglesworth and
signed "EW." : “Ianthe, I asked B’t who she was.”

440364

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

Mr. Blunt wants to exchange his American Annual Register for
the U. S. Review. I have no objection if the other proprietors agree
to it. I am making a notice of “Elliott’s Address.”

I have heard nothing from you about the review of Lindley Mur-
ray’ life and Mercier’s discourse.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

The review of Fowle’s Grammar is much liked here — & also that
of Brown’s philosophy. I inclose the poetry you sent to me the other
day — a little altered.

Feb 9, 1827

Dear Sir

I send notices of “Letters from the Bahama Islands” & “Simms’s
poems,” and of “Almack” and “Paul Jones.” The two latter are
written by R. C. Sands Esq. who wrote the translation of the “Stars”
from De La Martine in the last No. and who will expect to be paid
for this and also, as I should have mentioned before, for the Stars,
the poetry to be paid for of course at the same rate as the prose.

I send also some verses of my own and the poem by Digamma,
who as you may perhaps know is Professor G. W. Doane of the new
College at Hartford (Conn.) He has published a volume of poems,
and although somewhat inferior to Lord Byron and a few others in
the poetic line, is said to be a good scholar and a man of considerable
talent. I do not think the verses enclosed particularly fine, but they
will do, and the author has written and may write better.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

XVI

New York March 20 1827

My Dear Sir

I ought to have answered some things in your letters earlier, but
some how it has happened that whenever I have written to you lately
it has been in haste so that I was obliged to defer or at least forget
many things which I had to say.

In answer to a question you put me some time since concerning the
nature of the articles furnished from your quarter and the manner in
which the work has been conducted there, I answer that I have been
well pleased with the former, and particularly gratified with the lat-
ter. I believe that the later numbers are, if any thing, superior to
the others and as far as I can judge the work is gaining in the good
will of the public. I have however something to say on two or three
articles. In the first place, although I doubt not that the utmost care

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

is taken to prevent it, one or two articles of intelligence have found
their way into our pages which are not quite new. For example the
“Chinese advertisement” in the first No. was published in all the news-
papers five or six years ago. The “Turkish Anecdote” is more mod-
ern but I have seen it before — I cannot tell where — some time since.
I do not know from what source this part of the Journal is gleaned
but I should think the Revue Encyclopedique, might furnish a good
many valuable items. It seemed to me that the article on Williston’s
Tacitus was too caustic and contemptuous in its tone. Had you no
doubts about the insertion of “Micromegas” ? It was well translated I
allow — exceedingly so — but it is not new to many of our subscribers
in N. Y. who have read Voltaire in the original. Besides, Micromegas
has been translated into English already — the translation was pub-
lished in London in 1753 along with that of the Universal History.
It has been intimated to me that the extracts from the eulogies on
Adams and Jefferson were a little too liberal for the taste of readers
in this quarter — but this remark might have its origin in a feeling of
local jealousy — the authors of these eulogies being all except Mr.
Sergeant New Englanders.

As to Jones’s Indian Tales of which you ask my opinion I con-
fess that I did not like his Nantucket at all — the attempt at humour
was too violent and outrageous if I may so speak. But the “Indian
Tradition” I thought a great deal better — indeed it was quite good in
its way — with the exception of the interview between the Great Spirit
and the Evil Spirit which is altogether too extravagant for my taste.
This tale if divested of the blemish to which I allude I should think a
desirable contribution — but of the nature of the rest in Mr. Jones’s
collection I can of course form no judgment.

Prof. Renwick’s article of which you speak occasioned no com-
plaint here. I believe it is thought a fair exposition of the imperfec-
tions of the plan of execution of the Grand Canal.

And as to the article entitled “Nature” before I give my opinion
of it, I would say that it is in high favour with readers here. Several
persons for whose literary opinions I have great respect voluntarily
expressed to me the pleasure they had experienced in reading it —
among these was Miss Sedgwick the author of Redwood. I said
that I thought parts of it a little obscure — but I could not find any
body to agree with me. This obscurity is in fact my principal objec-
tion to it — but even with this defect, which does not after all exist
in it to a very great degree I like the article. I like it, partly because
it is an instance of the moral and intellectual speculation which is rare
in our country, and which therefore I think may very agreeably
diversify the pages of our journal. I do not understand the author as
you seem to do, to bring a general condemnation against learning, and

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

if he does, I do not agree with him. I understand him to say that too
close and exclusive attention to particulars is apt to disqualify the
mind for broad and comprehensive views of things. This I believe is
as true as that a man who gives his sole attention to watchmaking will
not be likely to be a good architect. This however is, or should be,
no objection to the trade of watchmaking, for we must have watch-
makers and we must have architects. I am myself an admirer of
learning though not one of her most favoured admirers — but I would
not exclude speculations on the moral and intellectual capacities of our
nature when they were ingenious and intelligible, particularly from
the Miscellaneous part of our Journal. With respect to the style of
“Nature” I must confess I do not see any great objection that can be
made to it, except the mistiness in one or two places.

Of Swedenborg I only know that I cannot either understand or
read his works — Concerning Mr. Reed I agree with you. And as to
Wordsworth, although he is a sort of poetical master of mine I do
not believe that we should much disagree in opinion. I like his Peter
Bell tho! To my shame be it spoken I had never read it when I
received your letter, but I have read it since with great pleasure, and
think that Wordsworth has written worse things. Wordsworth has
his faults and among them is I think a want of terseness, an occasional
wire drawing and extenuation of meaning which I do not like and
should be loth to imitate. But his spirituality and his vein of lofty
and profound meditation I admire and am awed by it whenever I take
up his works. I think that in the literature of our own country as
compared with that of England there is apparent something of a
worldly material spirit such as might be expected in the literature of
a people devoted to trade and gain. I could wish that the same
remedy might be applied with a view of correcting our character
through our literature — but I do not know that it is possible. You
see Sir that this is a subject upon which much may be said. I shall
leave it with observing that I am not more a friend to childishness or
obscurity than you are. I do not feel any strong sympathy for the
former and the latter I labour to avoid. —

I do not know who W. G. C. is — but he has lately written me
from Onondaga in the western part of this State enclosing a poem
which I fear I cannot publish. The Reviewer of Mr. Brooks was at
first a little ill-natured about the alterations in his article but I apolo-
gized for you as well as I could. He wishes that the article might be
sent to him. If you have it by you I wish you would let it be sent to
me with some of the parcels that come to N. Y. but I would not make
a very painful search after it — for really I hope you have lost it.
Mrs. Simmons also wants the manuscript of her husbands letters
entitled Letters from an Adventurer in London or England I forget

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

which. I hope they are preserved for the poor woman has dunned
me several times for them. Will you be so good as to send them out
to me if they are to be found. I suppose that Mr. Wigglesworth will
know something about them.

Mr. Grenville Mellen wrote me a very long and strange letter
about three months ago and since that he has written me a very short
one. He wants to get back some poetry of his which he thinks I .have
got, and also speaks of a prose contribution to this Journal. For my
own part I am innocent of having in my possession any thing of Mr.
Mellen’s writing but his letters. He says that he has written to you
on the subject but has received no answer. I have seen I believe two
of his poems and sent them to Boston again — His prose I never heard
of before.

Mr. Renwick told me the other day that if I pleased he would
prepare an article on Sganzi’s Civil Engineering a work published I
believe at Boston. As it had been published some time, and you had
done nothing about it I told him I thought he might venture to do it.
If you have disposed of the work or have any objection to Mr. Ren-
wick’s making an article of it will you inform me immediately. Mr.
Halleck was quite pleased with the manner in which his poems were
printed in the Review — but I suppose the newspaper Editors in Bos-
ton do not know that there is such a work as ours for I saw the poem
on Burns in the Evening Gazette, credited to the Montreal Herald.
Cary & Lea manage differently. I do not suppose there is an Editor
of a Newspaper in America to whom they have not sent their new
“Quarterly” with a written request that it might be noticed.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

I have no great objection to reviewing Milton’s Prose works but
I cannot do it for the next No. Such a book you know must be read
with great care — and reflected upon a great deal.

I have received no list of the names of the contributors to the
two last numbers of the Journal. It places me in rather an awkward
situation not to know the names of the authors of the articles in a
work of which I am one of the Editors. I ought to be able to answer
the first inquiries on the subject — as a knowledge of the writers adds
much to the interest of such a work. Could not the names be sent me
along with the 6 copies forwarded me ? I should think that the most
(sic) way, and it would be the best way as respects myself.

XVII

N. Y. Apl 5 1827

Dear Sir

I send you an article on Dr. Clarke. I suppose you have the book
at Boston. If there are inaccuracies in the language I beg you will

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

correct them. I send you also some poetry I have received from
Jones. He wishes that the three sonnets should not all appear in
the same No. I wish you therefore to print the first and second in
the next No. and retain the other for the June No.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

P. S. Next week I shall send you some verses of my own & some
critical notices. —

XVIII

New York Apl n 1827

Dear Sir

I send you a batch of poetry which I have been trying to patch up
for the U. S. Review. Some critical notices which I intended to send
are not finished. They will make up 2 or 3 pages & will go by the
next boat.

I am obliged to your attention in regard to the names of writers
of the articles.

I have just read an article in the Statesman of yr city on the
March No. The writer of it complains that we review books that
have been published a good while. I cannot believe however that he
very sincerely disapproves this practice since his own article on the
March No. is published on the 9th of April several days after the
April No. was out.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

I send also a sentence or two about Mr. Cubi’s proposed work
which I suppose may go in at the end of the list of New publications.

XIX

New York Apl 12, 1827.

Dear Sir

I send you Notices of Tor Hill & another Book. If the article
about the Fine Arts in the reign of Charles is not printed I think it
would not be best to do it — for I have just seen it in a Weekly
newspaper. Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

Dear Sir

I send you a notice of Del Mar’s Sp. Grammar by Mr. Stod-
dard formerly a Tutor at Yale College, & one of the Biblical Reper-
tory, & two pieces of poetry.

I shall have by & by something about Sismondi’s History of the
Literature of the South, & Dr. Miller’s Clerical Manners & Habits.
Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

Dear Sir

I send you a review of Mercer’s discourse &c by Miss Robbins. I
shall pay for this article myself and it will therefore be included in my
20 pages. I also send a piece of poetry by Ianthe — (Miss Manley).

I shall shortly send something more. I mean to do something
with Everetts America — but it is difficult to know how to treat it. I
think it contains some capital errors — and what perplexes me more, it
has a political tendency, more properly speaking a leaning upon some
of the questions that divide the principal parties in the country. I
spoke to a distinguished literary gentleman about making a review of
it, but he, after having read it, said that he could not make such a
review as I would be willing to publish.

Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

XXII

Mr. Folsom

I have marked a passage at the end of Mr. Ware’s article which
I think should be struck out — as it may not be palatable to the ortho-
dox. If there should be any other passages in it that might be impoli-
tic to publish please to leave them out. If you should see any errors
in style either in his article or the two others you will not displease the
writers by correcting them.

Very truly yrs

W. C. Bryant

XXIII

N. Y. Aug io 1827

Dear Sir

I send you a Tale which has given me some trouble to write — A
page or two more will be sent on, next Monday which will finish it. I
shall send some poetry and perhaps a critical notice or two. I
expected a Review of Miss S’s Book Hope Leslie — but it does not
come. Yrs truly

W. C. Bryant

XXIV

N Y Aug. 13, 1827

Dear Sir

I send you a critical notice of Sismondi — a sonnet & the rest of the
story. — There are several books lately published here of which I
think I shall have to notice for your next — The Baroness of Reidesdel
— Nide Hunfret [?] &c.

Yrs truly

Hope Leslie I suppose I shall have a review of by & by.

LETTERS BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT

XXV

Dear Sir

“Hope Leslie” has been placed by Miss Sedgwick’s brother in
the hands of a person who has undertaken to give a review of it.
Indisposition has prevented its being ready for this number. The
other books you mention you may take if you please.

The address of Mr. Elliot, which I send you to print from I wish
you would return, as it belongs to Mr. Verplanck. Along with this

I send you some poetry of my own, a piece signed W. G. C

by Willis G. Clarke of Onondaga, another signed J. H. B. by my
brother, with several from your quarter, and two reviews.

You put a heavy load on my shoulders in printing the article on
Clay’s Speeches, and I have had occasion for some dexterity in parry-
ing the attacks made upon me for it. Clay is a political man and the
article is written by one of Clay’s political admirers and of course,
cannot be expected to suit those who are not of that class. Besides,
I have some doubts whether a literary journal is the place for discuss-
ing the questions concerning the propriety of Mr. Clay’s appointment
as Secretary of State. For my part I always thought the appoint-
ment a very bad one — never having much respect for Mr. Clay’s prin-
ciples nor a high estimate of his political knowledge. But the article
has been inserted and though I cannot say much for it I put the best
face on the matter I can.

I like Metcalfe’s article and not only consent but even wish that it
may be published with the exception of one or two sentences through
which I have drawn a pencil. These passages contain sentiments in
which I cannot quite agree with the writer.

Yrs truly

Pioneers o f tke R ock~Bound Coast

By Gleason L. Archer, LL. D., Boston, Massachusetts
President, Suffolk University

(Part IV)
CHAPTER XIII
Higginson’s Voyage to America

is one phase of colonial migration of our fore-
s of which we have a very inadequate understand-
To cross the Atlantic in a modern steamship, with
comfort and luxury that has been devised by man
in the past three centuries, is a very different experience from that of
the emigrants who came to New England three centuries ago. Fortu-
nately for us some of our early colonists set down in writing the chief
events of their long voyage to America.

Before taking up in detail the events that followed the arrival
of the six transport ships at their destination on the Massachusetts
coast, let us look into a typical ocean voyage such as every colonist
encountered in paying the price of emigration to the New World.

Aboard the good ship “Talbot” was a clergyman named Francis
Higginson, who apparently possessed all the instincts of a modern
journalist. The voyage, to him, was a memorable experience. He
was destined to end his days in America scarcely more than a year
after his arrival. But his observations on the New England voyage
will keep his memory green for centuries.

This remarkable man was about forty years of age at the time of
the migration. He had been educated at Cambridge and had served
for years as a clergyman of the Established Church. Through study
of the Scriptures and association with Puritan leaders he eventually
became a non-conformist. He was accordingly ousted from his pul-
pit in England, but was so highly esteemed by his congregation that a
lectureship was established for him, and supported by voluntary
contributions for some years.

MONHEGAN’S ROCKY SHORE

MONHEGAN ISLAND

Granite Battlements that Defy Time and Tide and Tempest

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

He embarked on the “Talbot” with his wife and eight children,
the oldest of whom was but thirteen at the time. In speaking of the
embarkation from England, Higginson declares:

But we that were in the “Talbot” and the “Lion’s Whelp,” being
ready for our voyage, by the good hand of God’s Providence, hoisted
up sail from Gravesend on Saturday the 25th of April, about seven
o’clock in the morning. Having but a faint wind we could not go
far that day, but at night we anchored against Leigh which is twelve
miles from Gravesend, and there we rested that night and kept the
Sabbath the next day.

It will be remembered that Gravesend is on the south bank of
the Thames. The two ships were facing the necessity of threading
the difficult channel by which shipping reached the open sea. This
explains Higginson’s next entry:

On Monday we set forward and came to the Flats, a passage
somewhat difficult by reason of the narrowness of the channel and
the shallowness of the water; and going over this we were in some
danger ; for our ship being heavy laden and drawing deep water, was
sensibly felt of us all to strike three or four times on the ground. But
the wind blowing somewhat strong, we were carried swiftly on, and at
last by God’s blessing, came safe to anchor at Gorin road.

The place referred to was a favorite anchorage of large ships
bound for the Downs. The Downs, or Dunes, is a famous road-
stead for ships, eight miles long and six miles wide along the south-
east coast of Kent in England north of Dover. It was not until Wed-
nesday that the “Talbot” and the “Lion’s Whelp” reached the Downs.
Here they were treated to an unpleasant taste of life on the ocean
wave. “Thursday, Friday and Saturday,” Higginson writes, “the
wind blew hard from the southwest, and caused our ship to dance;
divers of our passengers, and my wife especially, were sea-sick. Here
the King’s ship called the “Assurance” pressed two of our mariners.
Here we saw many porpoises playing in the sea, which they say is a
sign of foul weather.”

A circumstance now developed that caused no end of concern to all
those who shared the dread secret. A passenger named Browne who
had joined the Company at Gravesend had been ill at the time. The
ship’s physician now discovered to his horror that the man was ill of
smallpox. Such a contagion on shipboard could be exceedingly serious.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

On the following Monday when the “Talbot” was passing the
chalk cliffs of Dover the passengers were greatly alarmed to see six
or seven sail of Spanish privateers from the French coast bearing
down upon them. England and Spain were then at war. To capture Eng-
lish ships heavily laden with goods, was the ambition of these lurking
enemies. Many a craft on its way to America had been seized by
them and carried in triumph to some Spanish port.

Fortunately for the “Talbot” it was not alone. During her delay
in the Downs several other well-armed ships had joined her. For
mutual protection they had set forth together. This explains Hig-
ginson’s next remark :

But it seemed they (i. e., the pursuers) saw our Company was too
strong for them, .... so they returned back from pursuing us any
longer.

Attended by favorable winds the voyagers soon reached the Isle
of Wight. A delay was encountered at this place. The ship anchored
between the island and the mainland. Ten days on shipboard and
the near presence of land evidently created a great desire on the part
of Mrs. Higginson to step foot once more on English soil.

The condition of the wind indicated the necessity of remaining at
the anchorage in the harbor of Cowes, Isle of Wight. The clergy-
man accordingly prevailed upon the captain to permit a small group
of women, under Higginson’s escort, to go ashore at Cowes to refresh
themselves and to wash their linen. The old adage, wind and tide
wait for no man — or woman — now had its verification. The wind
suddenly turned during the night. The “Talbot” hoisted sail and
moved on down the inner channel, leaving the Higginson party in
the village of Cowes. Can we not imagine the consternation and
alarm of the unhappy group next morning when they reached the
dock to find that the ship had vanished? Mrs. Higginson had one
daughter with her, Mary, a pitifully deformed child of four, but the
other seven children were on shipboard. The clergyman endeavored
to pacify the anxious women by assuring them that the ship could not
go far without encountering adverse winds. The channel between
the Isle of Wight and the mainland was difficult for sailing ships, and
the wind and tide must be utilized when it served them well. Higgin-
son argued that the captain would not desert the party, and so it

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

proved, for during the morning all anxiety was removed by the appear-
ance of a shallop sent back from the “Talbot” to fetch the marooned
passengers.

The ship was then anchored at Yarmouth, eight miles away. The
shallop had no sooner put out from Cowes than it encountered a very
choppy sea, causing the small craft to wallow in a manner that soon
brought distress to the passengers. When five miles had been cov-
ered the women begged so hard to be put ashore and permitted to
walk the remaining three miles that the kind hearted mariners con-
sented. The physical condition of the party when they straggled into
Yarmouth was such that they were obliged to lodge in the town over
night rather than go aboard the ship. The fact that the vessel was
unable to leave the harbor for three days afforded an additional respite
and the group did not again board the “Talbot” until Saturday.

They had not long been aboard the ship before excitement occurred
over the visit of a press gang from the English Navy, the second expe-
rience of its kind since leaving Gravesend. As before indicated, Eng-
land was then at war with Spain. The “press gang” was an agency
much resorted to to fill up the ranks of the navy. A group of mari-
ners, headed by a naval officer, would visit ships in harbors, or
even overhaul vessels along the coast. Young and well-favored sea-
men were quite likely to be seized upon and carried off bodily if they
offered resistance. Two of the “Talbot’s” crew had been seized in
the previous visitation. This second press gang seized two others.
But captain and passengers joined in entreaty that the men be spared.
They pointed out that the crew was already short-handed and that the
lives of all aboard might pay the penalty for any further weakening
of the crew. The press officer relented to the extent of releasing one
of the captives.

The dreaded epidemic of smallpox had not yet manifested itself
on shipboard. The unfortunate Browne had been kept apart from
the other passengers as much as possible, but the ship’s doctor, the
captain and a few of those who knew the true nature of his malady
were on the lookout for suspicious illnesses.

The Sabbath day was always very strictly observed by the Puri-
tans and so we find the “Talbot” and its consort, the “Lion’s Whelp,”
tarrying in Yarmouth Harbor all day Sunday. Higginson preached
a sermon on shipboard during the morning. In the afternoon he was

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

set ashore to preach in Yarmouth, where he was entertained by Cap-
tain Burleigh of Yarmouth Castle, an aged sea captain who had
served under Queen Elizabeth.

Monday morning blew a fair wind from east southeast [declared
Higginson], and the “Lion’s Whelp” having taken in all her pro-
visions for passengers, about three of the clock in the afternoon we
hoisted sail for the Needles, and by God’s guidance safely passed that
narrow passage a little after four o’clock in the afternoon; and being
entered into the sea, from the top of the mast we discerned four sail
of ships lying southward from us. But night coming on, we took in
our long boat and shallop, and the next day we had a fair gale of
easterly wind, that brought us toward night as far as the Lizard.

The Lizard, it should be explained, is a cape that extends into the
ocean on the coast of Cornwall. It is about twenty miles from Land’s
End, which the ships passed early on the following day. The last
sight of one’s native land receding on the ocean horizon when setting
forth on a hazardous voyage is bound to be an event of major impor-
tance to landsmen.

Cotton Mather, in his “Magnalia,” has furnished us with some
details of Higginson’s farewell to England that do not appear in the
original narrative. We quote the following:

When they came to Land’s End, Mr. Higginson, calling up his
children and other passengers unto the stern of the ship, to take their
last sight of England, said, “We will not say as the Separatists were
wont to say at their leaving of England, Farewell, Babylon! Fare-
well, Rome! but we will say, Farewell, dear England! Farewell the
Church of God in England, and all the Christian friends there! We
do not go to New England as Separatists from the Church of Eng-
land; though we cannot but separate from the corruptions in it. But
we go to practise the positive part of Church reformation, and propa-
gate the Gospel in America!” And so he concluded with a fervent
prayer for the King, and Church and State, in England, and for the
presence and blessing of God with themselves in their present under-
taking for New England.

Thus after nineteen days in the coastal waters of England the
two ships turned their prows westward and entered upon the real
voyage to America. These sailing ships were tiny in comparison to
our modern ocean liners. They were veritable cockleshells in the
grip of the long surges of the open sea. In a brisk breeze, more-

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

over, the ship’s decks were always atilt from the strain of the wind in
the canvas. This gives point to the following observations by the
Rev. Higginson:

We passed the Isles of Scilly, and launched the same day a great
way into the main ocean. And now my wife and other passengers
began to feel the tossing waves of the western sea, and so were very
sea-sick .... Thursday (May 14) the same easterly wind blew all
day and night and the next day, so that some of the seamen thought
we had come by this time two hundred leagues ( i . e., six hundred
miles) from England; but toward night the wind was calm.

The ships now experienced one of those intervals of idleness to
which all sailing craft were subject. The waves flattened out. The
sea became like glass. The ships’ sails were useless, there being no
breeze whatever. Friday, Saturday and Sunday it was the same
story. On Sunday morning, while they were engaged in church serv-
ice, a breeze from the northwest, which was worse than none at all,
being adverse, sprung up to afflict them.

On the wings of this unfriendly breeze a hostile man-of-war came
out of the west and bore down upon the two ships. All was now bus-
tle and confusion on shipboard. If a sea fight were to occur the “Tal-
bot” and the “Lion’s Whelp” must haul in their sea anchors and be
ready for the manoeuvres needful to bring their cannon into play.

The frightened passengers gazed with fascinated eyes upon the
ocean drama in which they were so vitally concerned. The blue
ocean touched the horizon on all sides and nowhere in all that
expanse was there a sign of life except for their own and their sister
ship, with the ominous stranger drawing nearer every minute. That
the English ships intended to offer battle rather than attempt to
outsail the newcomer had its effect upon the warship itself. Its com-
mander was evidently fearful of approaching within easy cannon shot
until he had investigated the naval strength of the English ships.

The hostile craft suddenly hove to and presently sent out its
long boat, manned with brawny sailors, to reconnoiter. Not averse
to this inspection the crews of the two ships greeted with derisive
shouts the cautious approach of the long boat. Out of musket shot
at all times the boat made a half-circuit of the English ships and
then rowed lustily back to the parent ship.

The two clergymen, Rev. Ralph Smith being also aboard the
“Talbot,” had seized upon this exciting experience to implore the aid

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

and protection of God upon their frightened congregation. As if in
answer to their prayers they now saw the strange ship hoist sails
and turn, not in their direction, but toward the eastern horizon.

The anxiety had no sooner been dispelled than an ominous devel-
opment aboard the “Talbot” brought fear to every heart. For
several days two of the Higginson children had been ailing. Sam-
uel, a child of eight, and little four-year-old Mary were the victims.
The mother had considered the matter of slight importance. Small
children were subject to illnesses of one kind or another. For that
reason Mrs. Higginson could not understand her husband’s obvious
alarm over the children’s condition, nor the anxiety of the ship’s doc-
tor. It was only when she came hurrying on deck to fetch her hus-
band at the close of the scene just described and to tell him that
little Mary was delirious, her skin blotched and purple, that she
learned the truth. The child had smallpox!

“And little Sammy? Is that what ails him?”

“Yes, my dear. It is more than possible that what ails the one
ails the other also. I will call the doctor and hurry to our quarters
with all speed.”

Thus the dread scourge of smallpox broke out on the crowded
emigrant ship. All day Monday contrary winds held the ships to
bare poles, hove-to, drifting with their sea anchors. Little Mary
Higginson was now desperately ill. For more than a year she had
been afflicted with a curvature of the spine. The joints of her hips
had become loosened and her knees deformed, a circumstance that
had made her parents especially tender toward her. The smallpox
had smitten her with great violence. By Tuesday afternoon her
condition had become so critical that the doctor gave up all hope of
saving the child. True to his prediction she died that evening. Her
sorrowing father made the following entry in his journal:

And so it was God’s will the child died about five of the clock at
night, being the first of our ship that was buried in the bowels of the
great Atlantic sea; which, as it was a grief to us her parents, and a
terror to all the rest, as being the beginning of a contagious disease
and mortality, so in the same judgment it pleased God to remember
mercy in the child in freeing it from a world of misery, wherein

otherwise she had lived all her days So in respect to her we

had cause to take her death as a blessing from the Lord to shorten
her misery.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Rain and adverse winds marked with gloom the day following
the burial of the first victim of the dread pestilence. The eight-year-
old son of the clergyman continued to be very ill. “Thus it pleased
God to lay His hand upon us by sickness and death and contrary
winds,” writes the chronicler of the voyage, “and stirred up some of
us to make a motion of humbling ourselves under the hand of God
by keeping a solemn day of fasting and prayer unto God, to beseech
him to remove the continuance and further increase of these evils
from us; which was willingly condescended unto, as a duty very fit-
ting and needful for our present state and condition.”

This period of fasting and prayer was continued during the fol-
lowing day. The Rev. Ralph Smith joined with Rev. Francis Hig-
ginson in conducting religious services. They had the great satis-
faction at nightfall of a sudden shifting of the wind to a favorable
quarter. After six days of adverse conditions the ships were able
to resume their progress toward New England.

By Saturday the anxious parents were beginning to entertain hope
that their small son might live through the smallpox ordeal. The
other children had thus far been immune from contagion. Several
days of prosperous wind sped them on their way, but on May 26 a
sudden tempest bore down upon them from the north that, as Hig-
ginson expressed it, “hoisted up the waves and tossed us more than
ever before, and held us all the day till towards night.” This storm
proved so violent that a large dog belonging to Mr. Goffe, the Deputy-
Governor of the Company, was thrown overboard by a sudden lurch-
ing of the ship. Despite every effort of the sailors the dog was lost.
It should be explained that Goffe himself never came to America,
yet, like other capitalists who had invested in the stock of the Com-
pany, he was allotted land for a plantation. The dog in question was
evidently intended to guard the Goffe sheep from wolves that roamed
the forests of New England.

The voyagers were not delivered from the dangers of the deep
by the dying down of the gale at nightfall of May 26. The following
day is thus vividly recorded by Mr. Higginson:

Wednesday the wind still north, and calm in the morning; but
about noon there arose a south wind wThich increased more and more,
so that it seemed to us, that are landsmen, a sore and terrible storm;
for the wind blew mightily, the rain fell vehemently, the sea roared,

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

and the waves tossed us horribly; besides it was fearful dark, and
the mariner’s mate was afraid, and noise on the other side, with their
running here and there, and crying one to another to pull at this and
that rope. The waves poured themselves over the ship, that the two
boats (i. e., the long boat and the shallop) were filled with water, that
they were fain to strike holes in the midst of them to let the water out.
Yea, by the violence of the waves the long-boat’s cord, which held it,
was broken, and it had like to have been washed overboard, had not
the mariners, with much pain and danger, recovered the same. But
this lasted not many hours, after which it became a calmish day.

The pious chronicler explains with evident satisfaction that while
all this hullabaloo of wind and rain was in progress he was meditating
upon a difficult portion of the One Hundred and Seventh Psalm and
that he arrived at a satisfactory solution of its scriptural meaning.
Little progress in their journey was made for some days.

On June i they began to experience sultry air and unwholesome
fogs. Some of the Company were ill with scurvy. Many others were
now down with smallpox. Fortunately the pestilence was of a mild
character and no serious cases were now under observation. The
situation on shipboard, however, was so critical that the two clergy-
men resolved upon another day of fasting and prayer, scheduled for
the next morning, in a hope that the Lord might favor them with
prosperous winds. Their faith was more abundantly rewarded than
they had reason to hope, as will appear from the following quotation:

The Lord that day heard us before we prayed, and gave us
answer before we called; for early in the morning the wind turned
full east, being as fit a wind as could blow; and sitting in my study on
the ship’s poop, I saw many bonny fishes ( i . e., bonitos) and porpoises
pursuing one another, and leaping some of them a yard above the
water. Also, as we were at prayer under the hatch, some that were
above saw a whale puffing up water not far from the ship. Now my
wife was pretty well recovered from her seasickness.

With this cheerful note we conclude the first half of the voyage to
New England for on June 5, 1629, the captain estimated that they
were now half way to their destination.

They encountered icebergs on June 11, thus indicating that they
had reached the Labrador current. Observing that one mountainous
iceberg was aground and that the strong current was apparently pow-
erless to move it, they dropped a sounding lead and found a bank of

MONHEGAN ISLAND
A Lighthouse that Looks Upon the Sea

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

forty fathoms, or about two hundred and forty feet. The mariners
estimated that the iceberg towered at least that distance above the
water. Evidences of the nearness of land now cheered the voyagers.
Water fowl in great numbers also appeared in the vicinity of the ship.

The two vessels were striving to keep within signalling distance.
On the 15th of May they ran into a heavy fog and lost sight of each
other. This fog continued despite the fact that a brisk breeze was
blowing. Since there was no other shipping afloat in the great ocean
the mariners continued their southeasterly progress, sailing briskly
through the damp gloom and taking some chances with the floating
mountains of ice of which present-day mariners are so fearful while
traversing the Labrador current. The “Talbot” quite naturally lost
its sister ship during this day and a half of blind sailing in the gloom
of the fog. They had beaten their drum at intervals and anxiously
listened for a response, but in vain !

The Rev. Higginson makes record that while they were engaged
in a general prayer service on the deck of the “Talbot” on June 16 the
fog suddenly lifted, and they sighted the missing ship far away. The
captain of the “Talbot” immediately tacked in order to approach the
other. The “Lion’s Whelp” was observed to be executing a like
manoeuvre to hasten their meeting when the heavy cloud of fog again
descended to the water’s edge, blotting out all view of one another.

By good fortune, however, the ships succeeded in approaching near
enough so that the drum beat on the deck of the one could be heard
on the deck of the other. Thus guided the vessels made a cautious
approach and the commanders presently conferred together.

Despite the fact that the fog was now thicker than before so
that the passengers of the respective ships could not see each other,
they resumed their journey, sounding now and then to guard against
the danger of encountering land. To their surprise the mariners
found themselves in forty fathoms of water, which shortly decreased
to thirty-six. Later soundings disclosed a depth of thirty-three
fathoms. The depth continued to decrease at an alarming rate. In
thick fog they feared running aground and so changed their course
until they were in deeper water. In the process, however, the two
ships became again separated and not even cannon shot could awaken
an answering signal.

Thus dismally in the gloom the “Talbot” sailed on for another

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

twenty-four hours. On shipboard the smallpox was still raging. Hig-
ginson makes the following record under date of June 1 8 :

Thursday the wind full west, and contrary to us. This day a
notorious wicked fellow, that was giving to swearing and boasting of
his former wickedness .... and mocked at our days of fast, rail-
ing and jesting against Puritans; this fellow being sick of the pox
now died.

The ship had by this time discovered another shallow place in the
sea bottom since they were traversing the chain of fishing banks off the
Nova Scotia coast. The mariners declared their belief that they were
in favorable latitude for fishing. Sails were furled and fishing tackle
was gotten out. With shouts of joy the passengers hailed the wel-
come sight of the taking of codfish in great numbers. The sea bottom
was apparently alive with mighty fish, greedy for the bait and speedily
hooked. Thus in a short time the ship’s decks were littered with cod-
fish of mammoth size. A feast upon the sweet and toothsome fruits
of the deep was, therefore, in order and most joyously observed by
the passengers.

On June 19 the lookout on the masthead declared that he could
see land lying at a great distance toward the northeast. For several
days the “Talbot” continued in the general direction of New Eng-
land. It was not until June 24 that the passengers themselves were
privileged to behold the American continent. They were then seven
or eight leagues off Cape Sable. The voyagers were cheered also by
a report from the lookout that a sail was visible in their rear. Sus-
pecting that this was the “Lion’s Whelp” which had been missing for
seven days — they tarried until their consort came up with them.
Another death on shipboard was written into the records for this day.

After leaving the vicinity of Cape Sable and sailing onward down
the coast the voyagers had a clear view of islands and of hills along
the mainland shore. Let us consult the language of the chronicle
itself :

Now we saw abundance of mackerel, a great store of whales puf-
fing up water as they go; some of them came near our ship. Their
greatness did astonish us ... . their backs appeared like little
islands. At five o’clock at night the wind turned southeast, a fair
gale. This day we caught mackerel.

The next day, Friday, June 26, the chronicler records as foggy in
the morning, but clearing after a bit, revealing a sea filled with schools

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

of mackerel on all sides of the ship. “By noon,” Rev. Higginson
declares, “we were within three leagues of Cape Ann, and as we sailed
along the coast we saw every hill and dale and every island full of gay
woods and high trees. The nearer we came to the shore, the more
flowers in abundance we saw, sometimes scattered abroad on the
water, sometimes joined in sheets nine or ten yards long, which we
supposed to be brought from the low meadows by the tide. Now
what with fine woods and green trees by land, and these yellow flow-
ers painting the sea made us all desirous to see our new paradise of
New England, whence we saw such forerunning signals of fertility
afar off. Coming near the harbor toward night we tacked about for
sea room.”

The harbor mentioned in this narrative was not that of Salem,
but one on the southerly side of Cape Ann. The mariners were as
yet unacquainted with the coast, but perceiving a great and spacious
harbor were eager to seek safety therein, for the southwest wind was
troublesome and even dangerous because of the near presence of land.

The “Talbot,” as previously related, had parted company with its
consort in the great fog some days before. It was, therefore, alone at
this time, anchored in the open sea during the night of June 25. Fog
again vexed the sailors next morning, but shortly after eight o’clock
the weather cleared. The wind was still adverse. The mariners,
nevertheless, labored to bring their ship into a favorable position to
run into the harbor. Little by little they gained, but it was after-
noon before the cautious pilot dared venture into the channel. Hig-
ginson has thus described the perils encountered in the attempt:

About four o’clock in the afternoon, having with much pain com-
passed the harbor, and being ready to enter the same, (see how things
may suddenly change ! ) there came a fearful gust of wind and rain
and thunder and lightning, whereby we were borne with no little ter-
ror to our mariner, having much ado to loose down the sails when
the fury of the storm struck us. But, God be praised, it lasted but a
little while, and soon abated again. And whereby the Lord showed
us what he could have done with us, if it had pleased him. But,
blessed be God, He soon removed this storm, and it was a fair and
sweet evening.

In the meantime the colonists at Salem had beheld the distant ship
in its struggles with wind and sea. Knowing the need of a pilot to
guide the travellers into Salem Harbor, Governor Endicott sent forth

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

a shallop with a competent pilot to proceed at once to the scene. The
“Talbot” had no sooner anchored in the strange harbor, later the
famous fishing port of Gloucester, than the voyagers were aware of
a small sailing craft that came gaily before the wind down the channel
which they had just traversed with such difficulty. With loud hosan-
nas the newcomers hailed the “Talbot” and were presently alongside.

“Welcome to New England!” cried their leader as he clambered
onto the deck of the emigrant ship. “We bring you the greetings and
the blessings of our Governor, Master Endicott.”

“In God’s name we return your gracious salutations,” cried Rev.
Francis Higginson devoutly, “but have you heard aught of our sister
ship, the ‘Lion’s Whelp’ ?”

“No, not the ‘Lion’s Whelp,’ but the ‘George’ has arrived. She
is now safely anchored in our harbor of Salem.”

“The ‘George’ sailed a week before we did.”

“These five days she has been at Salem and our Governor has had
a lookout posted to watch for the ‘Talbot’ and the ‘Lion’s Whelp.’ ”
The travellers were not long in uncertainty concerning the fate of
their sister ship, for she presently joined them.

The harbor where the “Talbot” was now anchored was but nine
miles from Salem. It was too late to make the passage that night
and the following day was Sunday. In this age it would be consid-
ered quite the thing for voyagers who had long been confined in
cramped quarters on ship board to complete their journey on the Sab-
bath day, and thus to join their friends in Salem. But the Puritan
code of morals forbade any manner of work on the Lord’s Day. All
day Sunday, therefore, the “Talbot” lay at anchor in the forest-
bordered harbor of Gloucester. The Rev. Francis Higginson preached
an eloquent sermon of rejoicing at their safe arrival in the New
World, yet not a soul stirred from the anchorage.

On Monday, however, the mariners, under command of the pilot
sent by John Endicott, set forth from the harbor of refuge and sailed
down the coast.

The narrative thus simply describes the conclusion of their long
and perilous voyage :

As we passed along it was wonderful to behold so many islands,
replenished with thick woods and high trees, and many fair green
pastures. And being come into the harbor we saw the “George” to

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

our great comfort, there being come on Tuesday, which was seven
days before us. We rested that night with glad and thankful hearts
that God had put an end to our long and tedious journey through the
greatest sea in the world.

The next morning the Governor came aboard our ship and bade
us kindly welcome, and invited me and my wife to come on shore and
take our lodging in his house, which we did accordingly.

Thus we end the recital of a typical voyage by which our sturdy
ancestors crossed from England to the shores of Massachusetts Bay.
Thus came to America the Rev. Francis Higginson, one of the first of
the Puritan Clergymen who were destined to set the seal of a stern
code of morals upon the infant colony on the wilderness shores of
America.

CHAPTER XIV

A Government Established at Salem

When the Higginson contingent reached Salem toward the end
of June, 1629, they found a modest settlement of about ten houses for
the ordinary colonists and a special residence newly completed for the
Governor. Since about two hundred passengers had arrived, fifty-
two on the “George,” one hundred on the “Talbot” and more than
forty on the “Lion’s Whelp,” it was necessary for them to fall to
work with all speed in the construction of houses. In the meantime
the new colonists set up temporary quarters in tents and huts hastily
constructed. It was summer, with sunshine such as they had never
experienced in England. The newcomers were, therefore, well con-
tent with conditions as they found them in Salem and could labor
zealously to provide themselves with permanent homes.

The chief activity of the colony was directed to the preparation
of lumber for house building. The nearby forests now resounded to
the ring of axes and the busy murmur of saws in the hands of sturdy
colonists. A score of houses were in process at the same time, so in a
few days the settlement took on all the features of a thriving town.

Governor Endicott was ever a man of action. Suddenly con-
fronted by the great problems involved in the settling of a large num-
ber of colonists not only in Salem, but also at various points along the
coast, he made haste to lay plans for the establishment of a govern-
ment for the entire territory. His letter of instructions from the
Massachusetts Bay Company had clothed him with full authority as
Governor-General. He accordingly issued summonses to all groups
of colonists, requesting them to assemble in Salem for the setting up
of a form of government.

A circumstance that favored the sending out of summonses for
a general conference at Salem was the necessity of advising Governor
Bradford of Plymouth of the arrival of the Leyden passengers who
had been transported on the three ships “Mayflower,” “Pilgrim” and
“Four Sisters,” that reached Salem shortly after the three ships
already mentioned. Plymouth Colony had long been seeking to pro-
vide the means of transporting members of the Robinson congrega-

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

tion from Leyden to America and had seized upon the sailing of the
Puritan fleet as a means to that end.

James Shirley, the agent in England of the Pilgrim Fathers, had
engaged passage for thirty-five Leyden colonists with the Bay Colony
expedition. With their goods and chattels the long exiled Separatists
landed in Salem, which was then ill-prepared for their accommoda-
tion. Governor Endicott was somewhat uneasy over the heretical
views of this alien group ; consequently, he made haste to send word
to Plymouth Plantation to provide shipping for them at the earliest
possible moment. Thus he was able to utilize the same messengers
in the task of summoning all planters along the coast to a conference.

There were now to be found settlers at Weymouth, Nantasket,
Merrymount, at various islands in Boston Harbor, as well as along
the mainland in the territory now confirmed by royal grant to the
Massachusetts Bay Company. While the Governor’s messengers
may not have been overwelcome, yet the sturdy planters promised
to attend the conference, if only to air their views of the general
situation.

A matter of immediate concern to Governor Endicott was the
case of the Rev. Ralph Smith, who had arrived on the “Talbot” with
Higginson. It will be remembered that the officers of the Bay Corm
pany had learned, after Smith had been accepted as one of the
ministers for the Colony, that his Puritanism was unsound. He was
suspected of being a Separatist. Since Smith and his family had
already embarked on the “Talbot,” with their household goods on
shipboard, it was not deemed prudent to turn him back.

Matthew Cradock, the Governor of the Company, had, there-^
fore, written to Endicott to give the Rev. Smith a very thorough
examination as to the true nature of his religious belief. If he should
be found unwilling to conform in all respects to the Puritan faith he
was not to be permitted to remain in the Colony.

The suspected clergyman had no sooner landed on American
soil than he found himself summoned into the presence of the stern-
faced Governor. A widower and burdened with many cares, John
Endicott was in no mood to treat with charity any deviation from his
own conceptions of religious faith. The conference was held in the
Governor’s house — the house newly built in which the Rev. Francis
Higginson was now a guest.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

It will be remembered that Smith had assisted Higginson in some
of the religious services on shipboard. They had been together for
more than seven weeks, with religious themes constantly on their
tongues. Smith had quite fully revealed his unorthodox views on
church ritual and had found his fellow-clergyman tolerant and sympa-
thetic. When, therefore, he found Rev. Francis Higginson in the
council room with the Governor when he entered, it seemed to him a
reassuring circumstance.

Smith was no doubt hoping that the conference had been called
to consider the religious duties of the four clergymen now in the
Colony. Rev. Samuel Skelton had arrived on the “George”; Rev.
Francis Bright on the “Lion’s Whelp.” It was at once apparent,
however, that the Governor was concerned over whether the visitor
was fit to preach at all. Ralph Smith was a straightforward and fear-
less man who had no hestitation in stating his views, nor in attempt-
ing to justify them to the indignant Endicott.

Higginson took little part in the inquisition, being a distressed
spectator, perhaps a bit troubled over his own disclosures to the Gov-
ernor of Smith’s privately expressed religious opinions. The inter-
view grew more and more stormy, ending in angry denunciations of
the visitor by Governor Endicott.

“You are unworthy of sanctuary in this new land,” he thundered,
“and I will take means to rid us of you and yours.”

Smith very well knew that this arbitrary man, clothed with auto-
cratic authority, would take extreme measures against him. Repent-
ing bitterly that he had brought his wife and children thus far from
home, only to land in such a hornet’s nest, he left the Governor’s house
and returned toward the rude shanty in which his family and goods
were temporarily housed.

By good fortune he now espied Roger Conant near the wharf in
earnest conversation with a bearded stranger. Having learned of
Conant’s former differences with the Governor and perhaps instinc-
tively believing that he was a man whose judgment could be relied
upon, the distressed cleric hurried toward him.

Conant and his companion turned respectfully toward the
approaching clergyman, for there was no mistaking his desire to
have speech with them.

“Oh, sir,” cried Smith when the greetings were over, “I find
myself in a most unhappy plight. I came here with my wife and chil-

SALEM “WITCHES” WHO DOTED ON POSING THUS
Snapshot by the Author, July, 1936

NO BROOMSTICK RIDING HERE — OCTOBER MORNING IN SALEM
Snapshot by Author, October, 1938

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

dren in full confidence that it was God’s will that I preach the Gos-
pel in this place. But your Governor has just threatened to send us
back to England.”

“Back to England!” ejaculated Conant aghast. “What reasons
does he have for such a threat?”

“That my views of religion are too liberal for this plantation.
He calls me a Separatist.”

“Aha! Like our friends at Plymouth Plantation! I was once as
harsh in my judgment of them, but I have learned to appreciate that
even Separatists may have kind hearts and be very good neighbors.”

“Would that I could flee to them for protection.”

“Master Bradford would protect you if he felt so disposed. If
there is any man on this coast who is a match for our own worship-
ful Governor, it is the Governor of Plymouth Plantation.”

“Oh, sir, tell me how I may go to him. This harsh man must not
visit upon my innocent wife and children his hot displeasure against
me.”

Conant and his companion exchanged significant glances.

“This man,” Conant declared, his face kindling exultantly, “is
not of our Plantation. His shallop rides yonder at anchor. He will
return tonight at Nantasko, the plantation of John Oldham. If I
mistake not he will take you and yours beyond the reach of our
sweet-tempered friend in the big house.”

“That I will,” cried the other heartily, “and find pleasure in the
task. Master Oldham has a patent to Nantasko and all the land
thereabouts, but this Colony is laying claim to it under a second grant
from the same owner. We have no love for Master Endicott and his
high-handed rule.”

Thus the clergyman was offered a means of escape from Salem.
That very evening he and his family were spirited aboard the visit-
ing shallop. Before John Endicott knew what had happened the fugi-
tives were well on their way to the Oldham trading post.

Salem was soon to witness the assembling of colonists from various
points along the coast from Cape Ann to Nantasket, in answer to the
summons of Governor Endicott. But it must not be supposed that
Endicott was planning to establish a government in which the various
plantations would enjoy representation and lawmaking power. Not
at all. The Massachusetts Bay Company, of whom Matthew Cra-

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

dock was Governor or Chairman, had already formulated plans for
the government of the Colony, as will be seen from the following
quotation from the letter of instructions to Endicott of April 17,
1629 :

We have, in prosecution of that good opinion we have always had
of you, confirmed you as Governor of our Plantation, and joined in
commission with you the three ministers, namely, Mr. Francis Hig-
ginson, Mr. Samuel Skelton, and Mr. Francis Bright; also Mr. John
and Samuel Brown, Mr. Thomas Graves and Mr. Samuel Sharpe;
and for that we have ordered that the body of the government there
shall consist of thirteen persons, we are content the old planters that
are now there within our plantation and limits thereof, shall choose
the discreetest and judicial men amongst themselves to be of the gov-
ernment, that they may see we are not wanting to give them fitting
respect, in that we would have their consent (if it may be) in making
wholesome constitutions for government; always provided, that none
shall be chosen, or meddle in their choice, but such as will live amongst
us and conform themselves to our government.

Thus it will be seen that the colonists along the coast were very
much restricted in what they might do at the conference. They were
privileged to choose two members of the council of thirteen provided
they could agree among themselves upon any two men. Since the
various local settlements had little to do with one another and each
unit was headed by pioneers with ideas and ambitions of their own
the probability of agreement was not great. With this explana-
tion we may the better understand the following provision:

But if they shall refuse to perform this our direction, then we
hereby authorize you and those nominated to be of the council afore-
said, to nominate and elect two such men as in your opinions you shall
hold meet for that place and office; and for the other three which will
be wanting to make up the full number of thirteen (which we have
styled the council of Massachusetts Bay) we hereby authorize you
with the aforenamed seven persons to choose and nominate them out
of the whole body of the company, as well as of those that are there
as of those that come now.

It is not to be supposed that John Endicott declared in advance
to the colonists whom he summoned to Salem the nature of his instruc-
tions from the home office of the company. They were bidden merely
to a conference to establish an orderly government for the protection

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

of all. The conference itself, therefore, held possibilities of disillu-
sionment and animosity.

Even Thomas Morton, the impudent and reckless troublemaker
of Merrymount, was among those who assembled in Salem at the
Governor’s conference. To a man of his sardonic humor it must have
been a great satisfaction to rub elbows with the very planters who
had not long before combined against him and caused his arrest for
trading firearms with the Indians. It will be remembered that in spite
of the heavy expense of legal proceedings Morton’s case had been
thrown out of the English courts and the culprit himself had returned
to America. The vexation of his former captors and even of the
Governor himself was heightened by the fact that Morton was a
clever lawyer, more than a match for them all in this business of estab-
lishing laws and regulations.

When Governor Endicott had opened the meeting, after an elo-
quent prayer by Rev. Samuel Skelton, and had read to the assem-
bled planters the terms imposed by the Massachusetts Bay Company
the first skirmish of the conference was on.

“Do I understand, Master Endicott,” inquired Thomas Morton
with biting sarcasm, “that we may choose two members of the sacred
thirteen, provided we can agree upon two planters who will each in
turn agree to anything the other eleven may decide?”

“The choice of two planters must be made in good faith,” rejoined
the Governor icily, “and only such may be chosen as are known to be
law-abiding.”

“How indeed may any man be law-abiding until laws are made by
which he may abide?”

“The laws of Holy Writ and of the land from which we came
are our true and proper guides, Master Morton.”

“In that event, Master Endicott, I am indeed doubly qualified to
serve this Colony. I was accused not long since of offenses not so
much as mentioned in Holy Writ and the judges in the courts of
England restored me my liberty in that I was arrested for no offense
against the laws of our homeland.”

Governor John Endicott had been bred a soldier. He was no
match in the subtleties of language for the astute Morton. His only
reliance in a contest of this sort was upon the learned and pious clergy-
man, Samuel Skelton. It will be remembered that Skelton had arrived

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

a full week before Higginson and Bright reached Salem. He had
brought with him, moreover, a copy of the letter of instructions by
which Endicott was to be guided. Together they had analyzed and
weighed its contents. Skelton, moreover, had a very thorough knowl-
edge of the laws of Moses and was eager to put those laws into
operation.

The situation in which the colonists found themselves was, indeed,
peculiar. They had never understood the mysteries of the common
law of the homeland, and they distrusted the system because of its
amazing technicalities. There was no special reason why they should
endeavor to apply so complicated a system of laws in their simple and
primitive settlements on the coast of New England, especially when
no one in their midst except the discredited lawyer, Thomas Morton,
knew anything of the common law of England. The clergyman was
astute enough to perceive that if the colonists, to whom the Bible
was already a daily companion, could be persuaded to accept it as
their guide in secular affairs, the Colony would become utterly depend-
ent upon it, thus magnifying the importance of the church and of its
clergy as interpreters of the word of God. He, therefore, strongly
championed the idea of disregarding the common law of England and
relying upon those higher laws that might be found only in the Bible.
Endicott, therefore, fell in with the plan to make Holy Writ their
sole reliance in the new Colony. He now presented to the assem-
bly a written document in the nature of an informal constitution which
he and Rev. Samuel Skelton had prepared. The general tenor of the
document was that the Colony should rely upon the Bible not only for
spiritual guidance, but also for direction in all civil affairs.

“What better guide can men have than God’s holy word?”
declared Endicott at the conclusion of the reading of the articles. “In
the Bible we find the laws by which crimes are punished and the very
punishments themselves. What more fitting thing that in this new
land we should look to the holy book for the ordering of our daily
lives ?”

Thomas Morton, of Merrymount, was on his feet. “But Mas-
ter Endicott, there are many things in the Hebrew laws that Eng-
lishmen have long refused to obey.”

“Quite true, Master Morton, the Ten Commandments, for
instance, but we be for the most part a God-fearing group of men and

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

women, and there should be no hardship to any if all are required to
obey the commands given by God himself on Mount Sinai.”

“I speak not of the Ten Commandments, Master Endicott.
These Commandments be very popular at my little settlement of
Mare Mount. I am thinking of whether this Colony is to be Eng-
lish or Jewish, whether all the males in this Colony are to be sub-
ject to a certain well-known bit of Jewish surgery.”

“Stop, Master Morton,” thundered the Governor with livid coun-
tenance. “If you have come here to make light of our holy book — to
cause trouble in this solemn hour, then know you that I have full
power to deal with such as you.”

“Nay, nay, Master Endicott. I am merely pointing out that the
English nation has long since learned that the laws and customs of
the Jews, handed down by Moses more than three thousand years
ago, are not suitable for Christian man. Our neighbors at Plymouth
have tried the experiment these nine years past, and they have found
it necessary to make new laws for their own guidance.”

“Master Morton has pointed out a great truth, Master Endi-
cott,” cried Roger Conant earnestly.

“Will it not be said in England that we have become Separatists
and not Puritans, if we make the same experiment?”

“Nay, Master Conant, we have no intention of relying entirely
upon the Bible, for we must deal with matters not touched upon by
the Good Book.”

“Then, Master Endicott,” rejoined Thomas Morton, “there can
be no objection to the plan I have in mind of adding to your statement
a proviso that we follow the dictates of the Bible in all points not
inconsistent with the laws of England.”

Greatly as John Endicott disliked Thomas Morton and much as
he distrusted any proposition that Morton might advocate, yet this
proposal was so fair on its face that even he could not openly oppose
its adoption.

The next proposition before the assembly was the burning ques-
tion of trading with the Indians. It will be remembered that to some
of the early colonists trade with the natives was one of the most
potent allurements of the New World. Here and there along the
coast might even then be found a tiny settlement that was virtually a
trading post to which Indians of the nearby forest came with furs

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

and other products of the chase with which to barter for gaudy trin-
kets, knives, articles of clothing and the like. These furs could be
sold in England at great profit. Thomas Morton had already won
unholy gain by trading guns and ammunition with the Indians, despite
the fact that to place firearms in the hands of the savages was a poten-
tial menace to every colonist, man, woman and child, in New England.
Another article of trade was that perennial mischiefmaker, intoxicating
liquor. The white man’s firewater seemed to have a fatal lure for
the simple children of the forest. It was demoralizing if not deadly
in its effect, for the stoical Indian had no self-control in the use of the
potent beverage. Morton and others had taken full advantage of this
weakness of their savage neighbors, for they had speedily discovered
that a thirsty Indian would surrender almost anything in exchange for
firewater.

The new plan of vesting all trading privileges in the Company
itself would automatically deny to all colonists the right to trade or
barter with the Indians. Every colonist who had already established
himself on the coast quite naturally regarded this plan as an invasion
of his rights as an Englishman. However, these colonists may have
distrusted Thomas Morton, yet in the discussion of so grave a matter
they welcomed his powerful championship. All eyes were turned
upon Morton as he arose to address the gathering after Endicott had
read the clause prohibiting private trade or barter with the Indians.

“Master Endicott, I protest most solemnly against this plan which
you have read. Methinks it is contrary to our rights as freeborn men.
It is dangerous as a policy of life in this wilderness.”

“How now, Master Morton, will you presume to criticise a policy
enjoined upon us by the proprietors of this Colony?”

“Criticise it, yes, with my whole heart, and I beg leave to explain
the reasons for my criticism. First, it is contrary to all custom in
England to deny any man a right to sell his property to whomsoever
may desire to purchase it. Do you question the truth of this state-
ment, Master Endicott?”

“But we are no longer in England,” replied the Governor impa-
tiently. “We are in this new land which belongs to the Massachusetts
Bay Company. We are graciously permitted to remain in this Colony
provided we are willing to obey just and equal rules and regulations.”
“But this, I submit, is not a just rule — nor a fair rule. If I have

6 4

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

a chair or a table more than I need for my own use, may I not sell it
to any other Englishman?”

“There is no rule to prevent you from so doing.”

“Precisely, but if an Indian should desire an axe and would
gladly pay me in peltry for the same, by your rules it would be unlaw-
ful for me to truck with him?”

“You would be dealing with heathen savages and not with Chris-
tian men. The Company reserves to itself all trading privileges with
the native tribes.”

“How then may the Indian barter for my axe, or better still, for
a string of beads or a knife? Must he travel to Salem to buy some-
thing that is in my possession in Mare Mount?”

Governor Endicott, like the choleric soldier that he was, found
his temper almost beyond control. Morton’s manner was irritating,
but his logic was quite maddening.

“What is the Indian to think of this state of affairs?” continued
Morton belligerently. “If he comes to me for things that I have
hitherto supplied him, and I refuse to sell to him more, is he not
likely to take it gravely amiss? The natives are revengeful and
treacherous. This policy would expose every little outpost along the
coast to hostility and danger.”

“On the contrary,” cried Endicott angrily, “it would prevent fur-
ther mischief on the part of men who traffic in guns and gunpowder
without regard to the safety of their neighbors. The savages already
have too many guns in their possession. They shall have no more.”
Then followed a heated altercation. Morton stoutly denied the
imputation in the Governor’s words. He aimed deadly shafts of
satire at the plan. But when Endicott finally declared that the revenue
from trade with the Indians would be devoted to the building of
churches in the Colony and also to the expense of erecting forts at
strategic points along the coast, the assembled colonists saw the mat-
ter in a new light. The burden of churches and forts would be upon
the shoulders of every colonist. Any plan that might lighten that
burden was, therefore, a benefit to all, whereas the right to trade with
the Indians might be of little or of no value to the average colonist.
It was only such men as the hated and feared Thomas Morton who
could derive much personal gain from the privilege.

Thus deserted, the Master of Merrymount could do little but rage

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

at the injustice of the plan, and to threaten appeal to the courts of
England. One by one the old planters affixed their signatures to the
articles of agreement — all except Thomas Morton, who had refused
to witness the spectacle. It may be that the astute lawyer realized
that he had better be on his way while the angry Governor was still
intent on the main purpose of the conference. Before the meeting
adjourned the Morton shallop was heading out to sea before a lazy
breeze, safely out of reach of Endicott’s restraining power. Morton
was on his way home to Merrymount, fully resolved to carry on his
Indian trading as before.

“PIONEER VILLAGE,” SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS — A DISTANT VIEW
Snapshot by the Author, July, 1936

SALEM COMMON

Snapshot by the Author, October, 1938

CHAPTER XV

An Independent, Self-Governing Church

It was inevitable that John Endicott, the pioneer Governor of the
Salem Colony, should encounter tribulations in his own official fam-
ily. It will be remembered that the Executive Committee of the Mas-
sachusetts Bay Company had sent over with the Higginson contingent
seven men commissioned to assist Endicott in the government of the
Colony. Five others were to be selected to make up a council of
thirteen, including the Governor himself as Chairman.

Since these seven assistants to the Governor, chosen in England,
were prominent or wealthy men, no doubt strangers to Endicott,
there would naturally be rivalries of authority to be threshed out
when the “Council of Massachusetts Bay” should begin to function.
There were two members of the Council, John and Samuel Brown,
who deserve especial mention at this time, because of a serious dispute
in the infant Colony in which the Browns were very prominent.

The first mention that we find of them in the Company records
occurred in the letter of instructions to Endicott under date of April
21, 1629:

We had almost forgotten to recommend unto you two brethren
of our Company, Mr. John and Mr. Samuel Brown, who though they
be no adventurers in the general stock, yet are they men we do much
respect, being fully persuaded of their sincere affections to the good
of our plantation. The one, Mr. John Brown, is sworn as an Assist-
ant here, and by us chosen one of the Council there; a man experi-
enced in the laws of our Kingdom, and such an one as we are per-
suaded will worthily deserve your favor and furtherance; which we
desire he may have.

The Browns soon demonstrated their independence of mind in
that most dangerous of all fields — religion. It has previously been
pointed out that the Puritans were a sect of the Church of England
who believed in purifying it from its abuses, working within the
church to that end. Now the three clergymen who had newly-landed
in America were confronted by a great practical problem. While in
England they had of necessity worked under the domination of the

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

established church, subject to its will and governed by its bishops
and dignitaries. But now they were facing the problem of setting
up a church in the wilderness, with a great ocean separating them
from ecclesiastical overlords of the Church of England. Should they
perpetuate in their churches in Massachusetts Bay the very abuses
against which they had so long struggled, or should they establish
a church modeled upon the Church of England, but purified from fea-
tures deemed by them objectionable? A real difficulty lay in their
pathway if they were still to claim Church of England allegiance.
The rulers of the Established Church might order them to conform in
all respects, thus raising a very embarrassing issue. Might it not be
better to do as Plymouth Plantation had done — declare their church
an independent religious body?

In this dilemma the three clergymen appealed to Governor Endi-
cott for official sanction to set up a reformed church with no official
connection with the Church of England. John Endicott, despite his
recent harsh treatment of Rev. Ralph Smith, had by this time seen
the futility of an attempt of non-conformists to establish anything but
a non-conformist church. The boldness of the move appealed strongly
to the spirit of a bold and resolute man, such as he.

Endicott, thereupon, laid the matter before such of the Council
as had already been chosen. To his surprise and dismay two of his
official family at once rose up in protest.

“We are not keeping faith with those who sent us if we do this
thing,” cried John Brown, in great agitation.

“In what way,” responded Rev. Samuel Skelton, “can this be con-
strued a breach of faith? Do not all of our brethren deplore certain
customs of the Established Church?”

“True enough, Master Skelton, but are we to abandon the Church
of England merely because we desire improvements therein?”

“Not so, Master Brown. But can we be expected to establish on
these shores the abominations against which we have labored? Mas-
ter Higginson and Master Bright agree with me that our church in
this Colony should be purified of all such abuses, but in other respects
to resemble the Established Church.”

“This is plain treason to the Established Church. It is setting
up a church like that of Plymouth — nothing less.”

“I do not agree with you, Master Brown,” broke in Governor

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Endicott tartly, “there is a difference between conforming to the
Established Church in all essential particulars as we propose to do
and having no ritual at all as is the case of our brethren at Plymouth.”

“A distinction in degree merely. The principle is the same — we
become Separatists and when that fact is known in England it will
prove the undoing of this Colony.”

Thus they argued the matter pro and con. The two Browns
stood out for strict conformity, whereas the other members of the
Council advocated a church modeled upon the Puritan conception of a
ritual free from Catholic influences. The Church of England, when
established by Henry VIII and his Parliament less than a century
before, as we know, had substituted the reigning sovereign for the
Pope of Rome, but had made few other changes. The close resem-
blance of the Church of England in its essential characteristics to the
Roman Catholic Church had long been a sore affliction to English
Protestants and especially to the Puritan sect. Freed from the over-
shadowing power of the English Crown and at liberty to establish
their own Church in America, it was inevitable that the new Colony
should set up a church in conformity with their own views, having no
official relation with the Church of England.

In every group of men there will usually be found some who stub-
bornly resist change from accepted customs. The fact that there
were two such men in the Council itself was at least indication that
among the colonists at Salem there might be a faction that would
cling to the ritual and customs of the Church of England. Gov-
ernor Endicott’s triumph in the Council, however overwhelming it
may have seemed at the time, was not the last that would be heard
of adherence to the Established Church.

The present generation of Americans may wonder at the fact
that both the Plymouth and the Massachusetts Bay Colonies yoked
civil government and church government together. But there is a
perfectly logical explanation. They were following accepted usage
in so doing. In this Puritan Colony, founded as an asylum for perse-
cuted members of the faith, church and state were to be one and
inseparable. In fact there was no precedent for anything else. From
the very beginning of the English nation there had been a union of
church and state, the church, in fact, often assuming to govern the
state, especially during the reigns of the weaker kings.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Governor Endicott, as a loyal adherent of the Puritan faith, was,
therefore, eager to establish a strong and well-organized church in
Salem. The church was to be his reliance ; his refuge and strength in
the problems that confronted him. Now, to establish a church involved
more than the mere gathering together of the inhabitants to listen
on the Sabbath Day to one or another of the clergymen then in the
Colony, since preaching services were held every Sunday as it was.
This preaching, however, lacked authority. A call was accordingly
sent out to all members of the faith to assemble in an appointed place
for the choosing of a pastor and for the establishment of a general
form of church government. This proclamation set aside July 20 as
a solemn day of fasting and prayer for guidance in the choice of a
pastor and teacher.

By pastor was meant the chief minister of a church. He preached
the Sunday sermon and was the leader of the flock. Every Puritan
church of early times seems to have had a teacher, or assistant to the
pastor, apparently with general oversight of the mid-week lectures.
These lectures were in reality sermons for the instruction of the peo-
ple in truths taught by the Bible, for there were no Sunday schools
or Bible schools in those days.

While Governor Endicott was thus preparing for the expected
setting up of an independent church in America there was, unknown
to him, an even more zealous movement afoot for the defeat of his
much-desired project. John Brown, the leader of this movement,
had been a lawyer in England, a man of no small ability and powers
of persuasion. His brother, Samuel, had been a merchant in London.
Both men were highly regarded by those who had been fellow-
passengers with them during the voyage to America. As will no
doubt be remembered, they had lost their fight in the Council, but sin-
cerely believing that to abandon the Book of Common Prayer and the
well-known rituals of the Church of England would be a grave mis-
take, they set about secretly to interview their acquaintances concern-
ing the proposed change. They pointed out the well-known zeal of
Charles I to enforce conformity to the Established Church. They
argued that so radical a step among the newly arrived colonists might
cause the destruction of the Colony itself. The ambitious plans of the
Massachusetts Bay Company, upon which plans their future depended,
might thus be thwarted by the rash action of their colonists in
America.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

These arguments were convincing to many. But the Browns were
struggling against great odds. The ministers of the Colony had
already begun to conduct services in which the hated ritual was
almost entirely neglected. The simplicity and directness of this new
type of service appealed to the people. An oft-repeated ritual that
had lost much of its spiritual significance, quite naturally suffered in
comparison with prayers by eloquent clergy, voicing the thoughts and
aspirations of their followers and appropriate to their present needs.
The charm of novelty and human interest was thus added to the bal-
ance in which the old order and the new were being weighed in the
public mind.

There were even greater obstacles in the path of the leaders of
this secret campaign. The ministers themselves were unanimous for
the change. Laymen in those days were hardy indeed who dared
oppose the opinions of university trained clergymen. Then, too,
there was the well-nigh invulnerable position of the party in power.
Governor Endicott, with his military training and headstrong nature,
could brook no opposition. His masterful conduct in the meetings of
the Council had already marked him as a leader who would enforce
his views at all costs.

The fateful date arrived — July 20, 1629. It was a cloudless day,
with a gentle breeze stirring the Salem cornfields and bringing to the
assembly, gathered in the shade of a grove of trees in the outskirts of
the settlement, the cooling breath of the nearby ocean. A platform
had been erected in the midst of the grove and upon it were assembled
the Governor and Council, with the two ministers, Skelton and
Higginson.

The service opened with prayer by Rev. Samuel Skelton, a prayer
for guidance, but also an eloquent and moving appeal that laid hold
upon the hearts of the people drawing them with him to the heights of
a lofty resolve. It is no small thing to blaze a new trail in politics
or religion. The assembled colonists, lately released from the over-
shadowing danger of persecution for their faith, knew full well the
significance of the action which they were being called upon by their
votes to ratify. For this reason they listened with rapt attention as
Governor John Endicott rose from his seat of honor to address them.
Bluntly and with all the directness of a soldier he stated the purpose
of the meeting.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Four weeks have passed since our brethren in holy orders arrived
at this place [he began impressively] and we have had much comfort
from their teachings, but we be a disorganized company. We hail
from different parishes in England. As yet we have no church and
no parish, no organization. We are met today under God’s blessed
guidance to choose us a pastor and to organize ourselves into a par-
ish, with regulations suited to our needs in this new land. Let us,
therefore, choose from these noble and devout men who were minis-
ters of parishes in England a pastor for this flock in America.

As we know, there were then two clergymen in Salem, Rev. Sam-
uel Skelton and Rev. Francis Higginson, Rev. Francis Bright having
gone South to the settlement at Charlestown. Skelton and Higgin-
son were thereupon formally examined by the Governor and his assist-
ants upon their religious opinions. Each of them gave answer that
a minister of God’s holy word must have a twofold calling. First, he
must be called of God to preach the Gospel, that is to say, he must feel
within his own heart an urgent desire to become a minister. Each
clergyman professed to have thus been called of God. The second
requirement of a clergyman, they each averred, was a call by the
people over whom the candidate was to be a pastor. In those days
such a view was radical in the extreme, since clergy in England were
assigned to their parishes by ecclesiastical authority without regard
to the wishes of the people of the parishes affected. It was, there-
fore, a distinct move toward democracy not only in religious matters
but also in secular affairs for, as previously pointed out, the English
people had hitherto regarded church and state as inseparable, with no
right of local self-government.

Rev. Samuel Skelton might well have been regarded as the lead-
ing candidate for the office of pastor, since he enjoyed the powerful
friendship and support of the Governor himself. John Endicott had
been a parishioner of Skelton when the latter had been in the active
ministry in England. It was no surprise to anyone, therefore, when
Samuel Skelton was elected official head of the Salem Church and Rev.
Francis Higginson was elected teacher.

The Brown faction was well content with the choices of pastor
and teacher, but when the assembly was called upon to decide between
establishing a branch of the Church of England in the Colony, or to
create an independent Puritan Church, John Brown, the lawyer,
brought into play all of his powers of persuasion against the innova-

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

tion. The Governor had hoped that all opposition had by this time
been allayed. Even when Brown arose to speak Endicott could not
believe that anything more was involved than the unsupported voice
of one man. He soon had reason to alter his opinion. An able law-
yer has a way of so marshalling known facts that listeners become
convinced, even against their will, that the lawyer is right. Brown
was able, eloquent and full of zeal for the cause that he had espoused.

As the Governor listened to the lawyer’s argument he was amazed
at the audacity and persuasive power of the man, but even more at
the effect he was obviously producing upon the assembly. A hostile
audience was becoming progressively less hostile. Applause from a
mere handful of supporters soon gave place to spontaneous outbursts
from the ranks of the Governor’s staunchest supporters. Before the
speaker had reached his climax the Governor turned uneasily to Rev.
Samuel Skelton.

“Master Skelton,” he whispered hoarsely, “this madman will undo
all our plans! You must answer him!”

“That I will,” replied the other grimly. “I will answer him.
God’s word is mightier than any Prayer Book.”

The Book of Common Prayer was, of course, the visible symbol
of the Church of England. To abandon its use in church services and
rely wholly upon the Bible for guidance was the united wish of the
Governor and his ecclesiastical advisers. In Brown’s argument he
had stressed the danger of such an innovation, picturing the wrath of
Charles I and the English clergy, if such radical action were to be
taken in the new Colony. His listeners knew all too well the zeal of
the Established Church in enforcing conformity. Much as they
desired the abandonment of distasteful ritual, their fears of reprisals
in England against the newly formed Company caused them to listen
with great attentiveness to the lawyer’s argument.

Logic and religion, however, are not always yokefellows. There
is something elemental in religious opinions — blind faith, perhaps, or
prejudice that springs forth in response to kindling words of a reli-
gious leader.

John Brown had spoken effectively. Had a vote been taken at
the close of his argument, he might well have triumphed over his
adversaries. But Rev. Samuel Skelton arose from his place beside
the Governor to address the assembly. Fired with zeal for the cause

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

which he had espoused and indignant at what seemed to him the lack
of courage of the opposite faction, he was soon launched upon a
speech of moving eloquence. Holding in one hand the Book of Com-
mon Prayer and resting the other on the opened pages of the Bible, he
closed his address by a dramatic appeal to his auditors to choose
between the two. In the stress of emotions it perhaps did not occur
to the multitude that the two books were not necessarily antagonistic.

Seizing upon the mood of the assembly, Governor Endicott put the
motion, with the result that by an overwhelming vote of the Church of
England was abandoned in favor of a Puritan Church to be self-
governing and independent, the Bible alone being its guide in ritual
and belief.

Before the meeting adjourned came the solemn and impressive
ceremony of consecrating the newly-elected pastor. The assembly
was confronted by the circumstance that they were creating a new
and independent church. It was impossible to follow precedents of
the laying on of hands by clergy of the same or a higher order. Endi-
cott and his advisers, however, hit upon the expedient of consecrating
their pastor by action of the civil authorities. After a fervent “sea-
son of prayer” the Governor and the members of the Council gath-
ered around Rev. Samuel Skelton. Each laid a hand upon him declar-
ing that they did so in token of his consecration as the first pastor of
the Salem Church.

When the ceremony had been completed as to Skelton himself, it
was decided to be proper for him to proceed to the consecration of
his assistant, Rev. Francis Higginson. In the presence of the assem-
bled church members, Skelton called Higginson before him and caused
him to kneel while he prayed for the blessing of Heaven upon the
work to be undertaken. Laying his hands upon the head of the
kneeling clergyman, Skelton declared him the duly elected teacher of
the faithful in the Salem Church.

The last official action of this extraordinary assembly was to fix
upon August 6, 1629, as another day of fasting and prayer for the
choosing and ordaining of elders and deacons, for the adoption of a
confession of faith and a form of church covenant according to the
scriptures. Rev. Francis Higginson was requested to draft, in the
intervening two weeks, the covenant and confession of faith.

CHAPTER XVI

Heavy Responsibilities of Governor Endicott

Governor John Endicott had many problems to face in the sum-
mer of 1629. His obligations to the Massachusetts Bay Company
demanded that the transport ships, some of which were still in Salem
Harbor, be loaded with a salable cargo and sent home at the earliest
possible moment. Furs taken in trade with the Indian tribes were
highly prized in England, but the quantity on hand in Salem when
the Higginson expedition arrived was necessarily small. It had been
sent home by the first returning ship.

Cradock had written in his original letter of instructions to the
Salem Colony urging the speedy return of the transport ships with the
best cargo obtainable — dried fish if the colonists had the means to
catch and cure the same, but if no better cargo could be had, then to
load the ships with lumber. To quote Cradock’s own words : “There
hath not been a better time for the sale of timber these seven years
than at present, and therefore, pity it is these ships should come back
empty.” He also expressed a desire that sassafras and sarsaparilla be
sent home in quantity, together with sumac, if there were such to be
had in the forest.

The “Talbot” was one of the ships especially mentioned whose
return to England must be hastened with all speed.

“But pray do not detain her any long time,” Cradock wrote, “to
cut timber, or any other gross lading; for she is at £150 a month
charges, which will soon eat out more than the goods she would stay
for is worth.”

Facing so great a responsibility, with several ships in the harbor
in the process of unloading or taking on cargo, Governor Endicott
was at his wits’ end to find men enough for the various activities of the
Colony. It must be remembered that house-building was an impera-
tive necessity, for a large portion of the newly arrived colonists were
still living in tents and huts until houses could be provided for them.

The Puritan conception of the duties of a government no doubt
added greatly to the cares of Endicott and his associates. In the
various letters of instructions from the Bay Company the Governor

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

was ordered, among other exacting tasks, to see to it that every fam-
ily in the Colony maintained morning and evening devotions.

Our earnest desire [the letter of April 17, 1629, informed him]
is that you take special care, in settling these families, that the chief in
the family, at least some of them, be grounded in religion; whereby
morning and evening family duties may be duly performed, and a
watchful eye held over all in each family, by one or more in each fam-
ily to be appointed thereto, so that disorders may be prevented, and ill
weeds nipped before they take too great a head.

Thus we may understand the complete paternalism of this new
venture in free-government — the necessity of a watchful eye over the
daily life of every individual in the Colony. That the officials of
the Bay Company understood full well the difficulties in the way of
such personal oversight of the colonists may be seen from the follow-
ing admonition which immediately follows the language above quoted :

It will be a business worthy of your best endeavors to look into
this in the beginning, and, if need be, to make some exemplary to all
the rest; otherwise your government will be esteemed as a scare-
crow. Our desire is to use lenity, all that may be; but, in case of
necessity, not to neglect the other, knowing that correction is ordained
for the fool’s back. And as we intend not to be wanting on our parts
to provide all things needful for the maintenance and sustenance of
our servants, so may we justly, by the laws of God and man, require
obedience and honest carriage from them, with fitting labor in their
several employments; wherein if they shall be wanting, and much
more if refraction, care must be taken to punish the obstinate and
disobedient, being as necessary as food and raiment.

This language may seem to us of the present day to be a tyran-
nical and unwarranted interference with the personal life of the indi-
vidual colonists, but here again we find an illustration of the Old
World conception of government. The individual, according to Old
World ideas, existed for his government rather than the government
existing for the benefit of the individual. Personal liberty and the
rights of the common man were still afar off, but even in this Puri-
tan Commonwealth there were already glimmerings of democracy, as
witness the Governor’s action in calling the chief men of the Colony
together to elect a pastor and teacher and to set up a new form of
church worship.

It is a singular fact that John Endicott, the first Governor of the

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

new Colony, was one of the most stern and iron-handed governors in
all the history of Massachusetts Bay Colony. He it was who years
later as Governor of Massachusetts hanged Quakers on Boston Com-
mon. We may, therefore, form some idea of the strictness of disci-
pline inaugurated by him in the infant colony at Salem. Clothed as he
was with unlimited powers from the home government and endowed
by nature with a narrow and uncompromising outlook upon life, his
rule could not fail to be memorable for its severity.

It must not be supposed that the powers granted to the govern-
ment at Salem were confined to mere oversight of the religious life of
the inhabitants. The leaders of the colonizing movement sincerely
believed that if they could maintain a godly community the chief
problems of government would be solved. To this belief we may
perhaps trace the extraordinary efforts of the Puritan Colony to
enforce morality upon all persons within their borders. The various
letters of instruction to Endicott are eloquent examples of this single-
ness of purpose. Let us consider the following from the letter of
May 28, 1629 :

We may not omit [the letter declares] out of our zeal for the
common good, once more to put into your mind to be very circumspect
in the infancy of the Plantation to settle some good orders (i. e.,
regulations), whereby all persons resident upon our Plantation may
apply themselves to one calling, or other, and no drones be permitted
to live amongst us; which if you take care now at the first to establish,
will be an undoubted means, through God’s assistance, to prevent a
world of disorders, and many grievous sins and sinners.

This language of the Puritan board of directors in England to
their Governor in America contains an undoubted truth. That truth
has passed into a proverb, familiar to us all, that an idle brain is the
devil’s workshop. In modern times youths who shun honest toil and
endeavor to live by dishonest means furnish society with its chief
problems of crime and misery. The difficulty of enforcing legislation
to curb idleness has always been an insuperable obstacle. But the
Puritan leaders were not the kind to voice platitudes without making
strenuous efforts to put them into practical operation. Let us see how
they proposed to banish idleness.

Servants and the unmarried were assigned to certain families and
required to render obedience to the heads of 'such families. This

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

made it possible to put into operation an extraordinary system of
family registers in which the activities of each member of a family
or group was recorded by the head of the family. The language in
which these regulations were voiced deserves repetition. We quote
from the letter of April 17, 1629:

We also send you the particular names of such as are entertained
(i. e., employed) for the Company’s service; amongst which we hope
you will find many religious, discreet and well ordered persons, which
you must set over the rest, dividing them into families, placing some
with ministers, and others under such as being honest men, and of
their own calling, as near as may be, may have care to see them well
educated in their general callings as Christians, and particular accord-
ing to their several trades, or fitness in disposition to learn a trade.

If we turn to the letter of May 28 we find the following:

The course we have prescribed for keeping a daily register in
each family, of what is done by all and every person in the family, will
be a great help and remembrance to you and to future posterity for
the upholding and continuance of this good act, if once well begun and
settled; which we heartily wish and desire as aforesaid.

The more we study these important documents of Puritan life and
thought the more convinced we must become that these men were not
wild-eyed visionaries who expected to create Utopia in America by
stern dealing with individuals. To their minds stern dealing was
necessary to attain a great ideal in statecraft, but they were fully
aware of the danger of tyranny, oppression and meanness in the
administration of these stringent regulations. Their desire to prevent
tyranny and to see to it that justice would be done to all persons, great
or small, in their Colony is strikingly manifest in the following extract
from the letter of May 28 :

And as we desire all should live in some honest calling and pro-
fession, so we pray you to be impartial in the administration of justice,
and endeavor that no man whatsoever, freeman or servant to any,
may have just cause of complaint herein. And for that it cannot be
avoided but offenses will be given we heartily pray you to admit
of all complaints that shall be made to you, or any of you that
are of the Council, be the complaint never so mean, and pass it not
slightly over, but seriously examine the truth of the business; and
if you find there was just cause for the complaint, endeavor to right
the oppressed in the best manner you can.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Could we ask for a more lofty expression of the fundamentals of
justice than this letter of instructions of three centuries ago? But
there is more in the same letter indicative of the profound under-
standing of human nature possessed by these early Puritans and of
their wisdom in linking ethical theories with actual practice. They
understood full well the pettiness and frailty of human nature and
the temptation that some might be under to abuse their authority.
Let us see how they proposed to guard against abuses.

Quoting again from the letter of May 28, 1629:

Such as are by us put in authority, as subordinate governors of
families, if they shall abuse any under their government, and after
gentle admonition do not reform it, fail not speedily to remove them,
as men more fit to be governed than to govern others, and place more
fit and sufficient men in their stead.

Thus it will be seen that petty tyrants were to have no place in
the Puritan Colony. If admonition failed to correct faulty conduct
then the offending leader was to be deposed and a new leader of that
family or group to be placed in his stead, he himself to be subject to
the orders of his successor in office.

Since human nature is ever prone to backbiting and to unjust and
groundless complaints, it might well be supposed that the Governor
and Council would be in danger of much unnecessary inquiry into con-
duct of family heads. But the letter of instructions carried its own
solution of such possibilities, as will be seen from the following :

If you find any complaint to be made without just cause given, let
not such a fault escape without severe punishment, and that forth-
with and in public, whereby to terrify all others from daring to com-
plain against any that shall be set over them without a just cause.
We pray you take this earnestly to heart, and neglect not the due
execution thereof upon plaintiff or defendant, according to the nature
of the offense. It will be a means, through God’s mercy, of prevent-
ing many inconveniences and disorders, that otherwise will undoubt-
edly befall you and the whole government there.

In some respects Governor Endicott and the Council were left
free to deal with ordinary offenses against the common weal, but
there were particular offenses against which they were commanded
to make stringent regulations. The first of these may be deemed the
forerunner of those “blue laws,” so-called, for which Massachusetts

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

was afterward famous — the matter of profanity. The Puritans took
their Bible very seriously. The Ten Commandments meant much to
them. You will remember that one of those Commandments read
thus :

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for
the Lord will not hold him guiltless who taketh his name in vain.

Now the Puritans believed that any such sinful violation of the
Third Commandment in their Colony might endanger the welfare
of all, hence the following admonition to Governor Endicott, as con-
tained in the letter of May 28 :

And amongst other sins we pray you make some good laws
for the punishing of swearers, whereunto it is to be feared too many
are addicted that are servants sent over formerly and now. These
and other abuses we pray you who are in authority to endeavor seri-
ously to reform, if ever you expect comfort or a blessing from God
upon our Plantation.

It is thus manifest that the punishment of blasphemy was dictated
not by a narrow dislike of the practice but by an earnest desire to win
from the Almighty a blessing for all the people of the Colony. The
same was true of other restrictive regulations that originated from
the Ten Commandments. Take, for instance, the injunction concern-
ing the Sabbath. The Puritans, as we have observed in the progress
of this story, were very punctilious in the matter of Sabbath observ-
ance. In fact, the Sabbath seems to have been regarded as beginning
at sundown on Saturday. A controversy was later to develop over
the custom, for there were those in the Colony who contended that
the Sabbath began on Sunday morning and they disdained to follow
the Jewish theory that a day began at sunset and continued until
sundown of the following day. It is interesting, therefore, to observe
that this early New England custom did not originate spontaneously
in Massachusetts. It was expressly ordered by the Directors of the
Massachusetts Bay Company in their letter under date of April 17,
1629.

And to the end that the Sabbath may be celebrated in a religious
manner [the letter reads] we appoint that all that inhabit the plan-
tation, both for the general and particular employments ( i . e., those
who were working for the Company and those who pursued private
employments), may surcease their labor every Saturday throughout

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

the year at three of the clock in the afternoon; and that they spend
the rest of that day in catechising and preparation for the Sabbath as
the ministers shall direct.

There was another portion of the letter of instructions of April
17 that bears eloquent testimony alike to the care that the promoters
of the Colony bestowed upon the selection of immigrants and their
zeal to purge America of wicked persons who may have obtained
entrance into this land of promise.

And whereas amongst such a number [the letter reads] notwith-
standing our care to purge them, there may still remain some libertines,
we desire you to be careful that such, if any be, may be forced, by
inflicting such punishment as their offenses shall deserve, (which is to
be, as near as may be, according to the laws of this Kingdom), to con-
form themselves to good order; with whom after admonition given,
if they amend not, we pray you proceed without partiality to punish
them, as the nature of their fault shall deserve; and the like course
you are to hold both with planters and their servants; for all must
live under government and a like law.

The colonists were also instructed as to their duties in respect
to the Indians.

We trust you will not be unmindful of the main end of our Plan-
tation [Cradock wrote to Endicott] by endeavoring to bring the
Indians to the knowledge of the Gospel; which that it may be the
speedier and better effected, the earnest desire of our whole Com-
pany is, that you have a diligent and watchful eye over our own peo-
ple, that they live unblamable and without reproof, and demean them-
selves justly and courteously towards the Indians, thereby to draw
them to affect our persons, and consequently our religion; as also to
endeavor to get some of their children to train up to reading and
consequently to religion, whilst they are young; herein to young or
old to omit no good opportunity that may tend to bring them out of
that woeful state and condition they are in.

This survey of the extraordinary responsibilities imposed upon
Governor Endicott is by no means complete. The burden of care, of
watchfulness to protect the infant colony against possible Indian
treachery, against human nature itself in man, woman or child of his
own followers that might cause a lapse from Puritan conceptions of
morality and consequently the incurring of the wrath of the Almighty
against the Colony, were well nigh staggering. None but a strong

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

and resolute man could have borne up under the strain as did John
Endicott. So we may picture him in the closing days of July, 1629 —
valiantly active, the driving force in every field of activity of the
Colony — oversight of morning devotions in every family; over the
labors of the day of every individual, whether of domestic employ-
ment or the heavier tasks of the settlement. The Governor thus
loomed in the background of the feverish activity of loading the ships
still in the harbor, preparing cargo for the stevedores or ferrying it
across from the wharf to where the ships lay at anchor. His was
the ultimate responsibility for the efficient labor of those who strug-
gled to fell giant trees in the nearby forest, and for the teamsters
who fastened chains to the great logs and goaded the slow-moving
oxen to strain at the task of hauling them to the sawmill. There
was not an ox in the settlement, had he possessed the intelligence, that
might not have traced his woes directly back to the taskmaster in the
big house. The men who operated the sawmill with its ponderous
and awkward machinery knew that the output of their daily toil was
each night being reported to Governor Endicott. Carpenters and
laborers who struggled to erect beams, cross-beams and rafters knew
that the eye of the Governor was upon them. They knew also that
he watched their progress as they clothed these sturdy skeletons of
oak and pine with newly-sawed boards; as they noisily hammered
home handmade nails supplied them from the nearby smith. They
knew that every hour was vitally important. They were fashioning
homes for families now living in tents or rude shelters, sufferers from
rain, mosquitoes and other annoyances.

Thus it was that in every field of activity of the Colony the Gov-
ernor and his assistants, tireless and watchful, furnished direction and
incentive for the labors of every soul in the community.

IN SALEM, WHERE ACROSS THE SQUARE OPPOSITE SALEM

CHAPTER XVII
Treachery Is Revealed

One day in early August of 1629 Governor John Endicott was
hurrying from the town wharf toward his own home. It was the hour
for the midday meal. Although the Governor was a widower, yet his
generosity in offering asylum to the Rev. Francis Higginson and the
latter’s family had temporarily provided him with a capable house-
keeper. Meals prepared by an experienced housewife were much
superior to the products of his own amateur attempts. The Governor
was, therefore, more keenly interested in mealtime than he had for-
merly been. Work was progressing well in all directions. The last
of the transport ships would soon be loaded with a return cargo and
ready to sail for England. The Governor, therefore, had reason to
be in an unusually amiable mood. As he neared the Governor’s house,
however, the sound of hurrying footsteps, and of his own name called
in unmistakable agitation, caused Endicott to halt abruptly. Rev.
Francis Higginson was at his heels.

“Oh, Master Endicott, so fortunate to have overtaken you — I
have news, disturbing news — ”

“Bad news, you say!”

“Aye, bad news. There is treachery afoot, good sir — treachery
in the Council itself.”

“In our Council of New England? Surely there must be some
mistake.”

“No mistake, Master Endicott. The two Browns who have
fought against the establishing of our church have now secretly set
up a rival church.”

“A rival church — in Salem? But they have no minister.”

“They have no minister, truly, but they do have the Book of
Common Prayer — and they are meeting for services with John Brown
and his brother as leaders.”

“Master Higginson, this is indeed heavy news. But it cannot be
tolerated — it shall not be tolerated.”

“Your instructions from the Bay Company, Master Endicott — do
they say anything about the form of services to be held in this
Colony?”

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“No, no, there is nothing definite on this point, but there is some-
thing that may help us. Let us summon Master Skelton. Let us look
into the matter.”

The two men hurried homeward — the noonday meal now of little
importance, a formality to be complied with for the sake of Mrs. Hig-
ginson and the children. The Governor sat in his usual place at the
table, abstracted and frowning until the meal was ended. Hearing
Rev. Samuel Skelton at the door, he hastily excused himself and hur-
ried out of the dining room to meet the newcomer.

“Well, well, my dear Governor, why this sudden summons?
Nothing serious, I hope.”

“Serious enough, I promise you. We need your advice and assist-
ance before the other members of our Council arrive. Master Hig-
ginson will be with us directly.”

While the two men were awaiting the coming of the other clergy-
man, Governor Endicott, in a few brief sentences, gave Rev. Skelton
the story of the rival religious services now being conducted in
Salem. Again and again Skelton declared the story fantastic and
impossible but when Higginson joined them the latter presented such
convincing evidence that there could be no further doubt.

The three men now examined the various letters of instruction
from England to discover what authority, if any, might be vested in
the Governor to deal with a situation such as this.

“Look you here,” cried Governor Endicott. “Here is the matter
plainly stated. In speaking of the ministers the letter of April 17th
provides as follows : ‘For the manner of exercising their ministry

and teaching both our own people and the Indians, we leave that to
themselves, hoping they will make God’s word the rule of their
actions; and mutually agree in the discharge of their duties.’”

“Truly there is authority therein for the action of our planters
in agreeing upon a reformed church, but does it give us, as a Council,
the right to punish those who refuse to follow our leading?”

“Not in so many words, Master Skelton, but have we not agreed
— all of us — that we will live by God’s Holy Book, both in matters
of faith and in civil affairs?”

“Even so, Master Endicott.”

“Then is not a secret violation of the will of our people an act
of rebellion that calls for punishment?”

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“That may be, but I should wish the judgment of our brethren of
the Council upon it.”

“They have been summoned to attend us — all save the Browns
themselves. They should be here at any moment.”

Salem was then under virtual military discipline. Governor Endi-
cott well knew the value of precision in all things. Mealtime was uni-
form throughout the settlement, in order that tasks might be laid
aside at the same moment and resumed as promptly at the close of
the period. The members of the Council who had been summoned to
the Governor’s house were to report immediately after dinner, as the
noonday meal was then quite generally known. Hurrying thither the
assistants were shortly assembled in the Endicott council room, listen-
ing to the story of mutiny in which two of their associates were
ringleaders.

“Why are they not here?” demanded one of the Councillors.
“Shall we try men behind their backs?”

“Not so,” replied Governor Endicott tartly. “Neither should
guilty men be permitted to deliberate upon their own punishment.”

“But surely they have the right of Englishmen to furnish evidence
as to guilt or innocence.”

“True enough and we will send for them presently. I have called
you men together for a private conference that we may decide what
right we have to punish them if it should be found that they are
guilty of setting up a rival church in our midst.”

The Councillors were in the thick of debate, with nothing definite
accomplished, when the two Browns unexpectedly arrived at the
Endicott door, having heard rumors of the Council meeting. In so
embarrassing a predicament the Governor took the only course open
to him of causing the accused brothers to be admitted at once to the
Council meeting. It may be that John Brown had already sensed the
purpose for which the Council had convened.

“A secret session of the Council, I see.” The sneer in his voice
did not escape the irascible Governor.

“Certainly, Master Brown, since you have already set the exam-
ple of secrecy. In fact, we were discussing Parson Brown and his
Prayer Book.”

The lawyer flushed darkly. “Do you presume to insinuate, Mas-
ter Endicott, that it is unlawful to use the Prayer Book of his Majesty
the King in a Colony established by his royal permission?”

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“We will discuss that hereafter. But now, my good sir, we
would know from your own lips whether on yesterday, the Lord’s
Day, you and others did hold a religious meeting, separate and apart
from the church established by the people of this Colony.”

“And if I should refuse to answer you — what then?”

“That is for this Council to decide. But we have evidence on the
point and it is not needful that you should answer — your refusal is
confession of guilt.”

“Not so,” cried Brown fiercely. “Under the laws of England a
man is not obliged to furnish evidence against himself. You forget
sir, that I am a lawyer and understand very well the rights to which
an Englishman is entitled.'’

“Master Endicott,” interposed Rev. Samuel Skelton, “would it
not be well to have the witnesses brought before us at once?”

“They have been summoned and will be with us anon. But Mas-
ter Higginson may in the meantime tell us what he knows of the
matter.”

Rev. Francis Higginson had no sooner begun his recital than he
was interrupted by an angry outburst from John Brown.

“Master Endicott, I protest against this man’s recital of gossip.
This is hearsay evidence — not admissible in a court of justice.”

“But we have witnesses to all these things,” protested the
clergyman.

“Then produce your witnesses and have done with idle prating.”
Proceedings were now halted by universal clamor, but presently
Rev. Samuel Skelton calmed the group enough to make himself heard.

“It is doubtless true, brethren, that we are not acting as a court
of justice should act in so grave a matter. But if I mistake not we
need someone to conduct this preliminary trial. My reverend brother,
Master Higginson, may well act in that capacity. Now, sir,” address-
ing himself to John Brown, “is it not customary for the prosecutor to
state what he expects to prove against an accused person — to state it
in advance of calling his witnesses?”

Brown bit his lip with vexation. The pastor had scored an impor-
tant point. The lawyer was obliged to admit the propriety of outlin-
ing the case in advance. Higginson thereupon resumed his summary
of what various colonists had reported to him after having attended
the meeting at which the Browns had conducted a Church of England

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

service. By the time the clergyman had finished, the witnesses them-
selves were at the door, Governor Endicott having previously dis-
patched the Higginson boys to fetch them.

The chagrin of John Brown was complete. Men whom he had
trusted, now that the affair had come to light, made haste to turn
State’s evidence against him. No useful purpose could be served in
prolonging the trial.

“Call no more of the caitiffs and cowards,” he raged. “My
brother and I will avow like men that we have done our best to
redeem this Colony from heresy, even though we may be surrounded
by heretics. But we have committed no crime. You men of this
Council do but injure your own cause the more to call us to account
for reading the Book of Common Prayer on the Lord’s Day. Shame
be upon you one and all that you be traitors to our holy faith.”

“Silence 1” thundered Endicott with livid countenance. “We will
not tolerate such scurvy insults under this roof. Call our sheriff at
once, for these men go not forth from this meeting except in custody.”
“How now, Master Endicott, have you so far forgotten the rights
of Englishmen that you seek to imprison men who have committed
no wrong? It is true that we differ from you in opinion but not even
the King himself would presume to imprison those who do not agree
with him in matters of faith.”

“This is not a matter of disagreement merely, Master Brown.
You have secretly set up a hostile faction in this settlement — you have
raised the standard of rebellion. It is not for your thoughts but for
your acts that I am to give you into custody.”

Since the Council, in its incomplete meeting prior to the arrival
of the accused men, had not arrived at a decision, the announcement
by Governor Endicott that he was planning to arrest John Brown and
his brother became a signal for surprise and consternation. There
was some uncertainty as to the right of the Governor to resort to
such drastic action against a member of the Council without an
express vote of that body. Members of the Council who deplored the
conduct of the Browns were, nevertheless, constrained to oppose the
Governor’s action as hasty and tyrannical. The two clergymen, how-
ever, upheld Endicott. It was largely due to their eloquence that the
dispute was settled in the Governor’s favor.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

The men were arrested and taken from the Governor’s house to a
place of confinement. After their departure the Council settled down
to the important question of what form of punishment should be
meted out to the culprits.

“Methinks we are stirring up a hornet’s nest,” declared Roger
Conant earnestly. “These men have powerful friends in England.
Whatever we may do to them is sure to trouble us hereafter.”

“True enough, Master Conant,” responded Governor Endicott,
still flushed from the excitement of the recent debate, “but if they be
permitted to continue their disturbances here then we will surely be
undone.”

“Can we not banish them from our borders?” asked Rev. Francis
Higginson. “If they be no longer in our midst they may cease to
trouble us, even as Ralph Smith, who fled from this plantation not
long since.”

“But Smith has been received into fellowship by our brethren at
Plymouth — he is preaching in their church. John Brown and his
brother would have no place of refuge unless we send them back to
England.” The speaker was Roger Conant.

“A good idea, Master Conant. What say you, gentlemen of the
Council, that we sentence the Browns to banishment to England and
send them back on the ships that sail next week?”

“Why try them at all?” cried Rev. Samuel Skelton. “Why not
send them back to England with written accusations against them, to
be tried by the Bay Company itself?”

“That would be shirking our plain duty,” responded the Governor
hotly. “Their offense is against this Colony, against the rules that
we have established for its safety and well-being.”

“I am not so sure that our duty is plain,” responded the clergyman
dubiously. “We cannot afford to make any mistakes that John Brown,
clever and contentious barrister that he is, may use against us.”

Despite the Governor’s earnest desire to put the men on trial in
Salem, the milder plan of sending them back to England to be tried
for their insubordination prevailed. So it came to pass that when
the last of the ships set out on the homeward journey during the fol-
lowing week the two Browns were aboard, raging and defiant, breath-
ing of vengeance when they should reach England.

(To be continued)

^Eaftmer

Latimer and Allied Families

By J. J. McDonald, Seattle, Washington

surname Latimer is derived from a corruption of the
lent Norman word, latinier, meaning a speaker of Latin,
more generally, an interpreter, since the term Latin
[uded languages in general at the time. According to
the Peerages, the noble families of this surname are descended from
Wrenock, the son of Meirric, who held certain lands on the Welsh
border, under the ancient Norman kings, by the service of being lati-
mer, or interpreter, between the Welsh and the English.

Arms — Gules, a cross patonce or, over all a bend azure semee-de-lis of the second.

(Burke: “General Armory.”)

Crest — A dexter arm in armour embowed, the hand grasping a fleur-de-lis.

Motto — Loyal au vtort. (Crest and Motto used by family.)

Early records of the name show, in 1086, Hugo Latinarius; in
1273, Alan le Latimer and Symon le Latimer; and in 1513, William
Latymere, in the “Register of the University of Oxford.”

(Lower: “Patronymica Britannica.” Bardsley: “Dictionary of
English and Welsh Surnames.”)

The best known, perhaps, of the English Latimers was Bishop
Hugh Latimer, Protestant martyr, and one of the principal promoters
of the Reformation in England. Born about 1490 at Thurcaston,
Leicestershire, he was the son of a yeoman and entered the University
of Cambridge about 1 505. He was elected a Fellow of Clare College
in 1 509, and was graduated with the degree of Bachelor of Arts in
1510, and with that of Master of Arts in 1514, having taken holy
orders before the latter date. During these earlier years of his career
he was a most careful observer of even the most minute rites of his
faith, but about 1523 he was according to his own statement,
converted from Romanism. Having been appointed a University
preacher, his discourses soon attracted wide attention and his influence
grew rapidly. In the Lent of 1530 he was invited to preach before
Henry VIII, who was much pleased with his sermon and soon after-
wards appointed him one of the Royal chaplains. The King’s favor

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

partly also resulted from the fact that Hugh Latimer, having been made
one of the committee to examine into the validity of the King’s mar-
riage to Katherine of Arragon, reported in favor of the King’s
divorce. In 1531 he accepted the living of West Kington or West
Kineton, Wiltshire, conferred upon him by Henry VIII. During this
period his strong support of the cause of Reformation brought him
several times into conflict with high church dignitaries and in 1532 he
was excommunicated and imprisoned. Through the interference of
the King he was released and, following Cranmer’s consecration as
Archbishop of Canterbury in 1533, Hugh Latimer’s influence became
very strong. After Henry VIII formally repudiated the authority of
the Pope, in 1534, Latimer was, together with Cranmer and Crom-
well, one of the chief advisors to the King regarding the legislative
measures that rendered the repudiation complete and irrevocable.
It is generally acknowledged that Latimer’s sermons did more than
anything else to establish the principles of the Reformation in the
minds and hearts of the people. In September, 1535, he was conse-
crated Bishop of Worcester. He resigned his bishopric four years
later. In 1546 he was again committed to the Tower of London,
from where he was freed through a general pardon on the accession
of Edward VI. In January, 1548, he resumed his preaching and he
immediately attracted great crowds. Shortly after the accession of
Mary, in 1553, he was summoned before the Council at Westmin-
ster. Tried at Oxford, where he was imprisoned again for a year,
he was eventually found guilty of heresy and on October 16, 1555, was
burned at the stake at Oxford, together with Bishop Nicholas Ridley.
He went to his death with the same courage that characterized his
entire life. His utter lack of intolerance, his great sincerity and his
remarkable eloquence made him one of the outstanding figures of the
English Reformation.

One of the historic episodes in Bishop Latimer’s career, mentioned
above, has been depicted in a mural painting by the English artist,
Ernest Board. It is to be found in the House of Commons, London,
in the corridor leading from the Central Hall to the Tower Waiting
Hall, was presented to Parliament by Lord Wandsworth, and is
entitled “Latimer Preaching before Edward VI at St. Paul’s Cross,
A. D. 1548.”

(Sir M. Conway: “The Historical Paintings in the Houses of

Parliament,” p. 5. “Encyclopaedia Britannica,” Vol. XVI, pp. 242-
243-)

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

I. Robert (i) Latimer, first of this family in this country, came
to America in the “Hopewell,” arriving in Boston in 1635. Robert
Latimer was a mariner, being master, part owner and finally full
owner of a coasting vessel. He removed to New London, Connecti-
cut, about 1660. According to some records he died at New London
in 1671, but other records state that he was “probably lost at sea
about 1671.” In 1690 his widow petitioned the court for a distribu-
tion of his estate, and it was divided equally between the two Latimer
children and the two Jones children, surviving from his wife’s first
marriage.

Robert (1) Latimer married, at Charlestown, Massachusetts,
September 1, 1662, Ann (Griggs) Jones, daughter of George and
Alice Griggs, and widow of Matthew Jones. Children: 1. Robert

(2), of whom further. 2. Elizabeth, born November 14, 1667; mar-
ried Jonathan Prentiss or Prentice.

(James Savage: “Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers

of New England,” Vol. Ill, p. 59. Madison C. Bates: “Latimer

History and Genealogy.” Family records.)

II. Robert (2) Latimer, son of Robert (1) and Ann (Griggs-
Jones) Latimer, was born in New London, Connecticut, February 5,
1664, and died November 2, 1728. He became one of the prominent
citizens of the Colony and captain of the militia and often served as a
member of the Colonial Legislature and the Governor’s Council.

He married Hannah, a widow, but neither her family name nor
that of her first husband is known. Children: 1. John. 2. Robert,

married, June 17, 1731, Mary Huntley. 3. Jonathan (1), of whom
further. 4. Samuel, married, July 11, 1723, Elizabeth Hallam. 5.
Peter, married, April 23, 1732, Hannah Picket.

(Ibid.)

III. Jonathan (1) Latimer, son of Robert (2) and Hannah Lati-
mer, was born in Connecticut about 1698. A copy of the distribution
of his estate in 1778 is on record. He is mentioned in contemporary
records as a large landholder.

He married, April 6, 1721, Borrodil or Borodel Denison. (Deni-
son V.) Children: 1. Annie, born about 1723; married, October 3,

1741, Charles Buckley. 2. Jonathan (2), of whom further. 3.
Elizabeth, born September 6, 1726; married Joseph Denison. 4.

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Mary, born April 1 6, 1729; married Joseph Deshon. 5. Amos, born
December 5, 1730. 6. Robert, born February 26, 1732. 7. Henry,
born February 28, 1737. 8. Daniel, born August 16, 1739. 9. John,
born December 21, 1741. 10. Borrodil, baptized February 19, 1744;
married Matthew Coit.

(Family records.)

IV. Colonel Jonathan (2) Latimer, son of Jonathan ( 1 ) and Bor-
rodil or Borodel (Denison) Latimer, was born in New London, Con-
necticut, March or May 27, 1724, and died in Tennessee in 1790.

Jonathan (2) Latimer served in the French and Indian War. He
has also a distinguished Revolutionary War record:

In 1775, after hearing of the Battle of Lexington, April 19, 1775,
he marched his Company to Boston and was at Bunker Hill.

July 6, 1775, he was commissioned Major of the Third Company.

June 20, 1776, commissioned Lieut. Col., Fourth Battalion.

Oct., 1776, commissioned Col. of Third Regiment, men from New
London and Lyme.

Sept. 19, and October 9, 1777, engaged in the Battles of Sara-
toga. The Conn. Regiment commanded by Jonathan Latimer is
highly spoken of by General Gates.

(Caulkin: “History of New London, Connecticut,” p. 512.

Hinman: “Connecticut in the Revolution,” pp. 186, 233, 236. “Con-
necticut Men in the War of the Revolution,” pp. 79, 403, 504.)

About 1790, Colonel Latimer determined to move with his fam-
ily from Connecticut to Tennessee. He was then an old man of
sixty-six or seven years of age, but it is believed the move was decided
upon in order to take advantage of the government’s offer of free
land to those who had served in the Revolution. His children were
grown, many of them married, at the time of the removal from Con-
necticut. The journey was long and tiresome, made by ox-drawn
wagons over poor roads, which were often almost impassable.
Wherever it was possible, use was made of the many streams in order
to make the journey easier. They traveled into the Cumberland coun-
try which lay on both sides of the line between Tennessee and Ken-
tucky; on the east were the western foothills of the Cumberland
Mountains, on the west the Tennessee River, with the Cumberland
River running through it from the east to west. The Latimers settled

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

in Robertson County, about ten miles north of the Cumberland River
and fifteen miles northeast of Nashville.

The journey, with its hardships, proved too much for Colonel
Latimer, who died when they had almost reached the end of the long
trip. He was buried in Tennessee, near Nashville.

Colonel Jonathan (2) Latimer married, in Connecticut, Lucre-
tia Griswold. (Griswold IV.) (Royal Descent from Charlemagne
XXXIX.) Children: 1. Hannah, born September 19, 1747; mar-

ried Daniel Rogers. 2. George, born July 29, 1749; married, Octo-
ber 10, 1773, Rachel Smith. 3. Borrodil, born December 13, 1750;
died young. 4. Jonathan, born April 12, 1753; married, August 3,
1775, Elizabeth Chapel. 5. Borrodil, born April 12, 1755. 6.

Wetherell, born March 18, 1757. 7. Charles, born June 30, 1759.
8. Robert, born November 2, 1760. 9. Nicholas, born June 8, 1763.
10. Griswold, born September 8, 1764. 11. Joseph, of whom fur-
ther. 12. Nathan, born February 25, 1768. 13. Daniel, born May

4, I77I-

(Madison C. Bates: “Latimer History and Genealogy,” pp. 6-7.
Family records.)

V. Joseph Latimer, son of Colonel Jonathan (2) and Lucretia
(Griswold) Latimer, was born at New London, Connecticut, January
or June 8, 1766, and died at his home in Cherry Grove, near Abing-
don, Illinois, August 18, 1846.

Joseph Latimer, about forty years after his father came to Ten-
nessee, decided to remove with his family to Illinois. His family, at
the time, numbered more than twenty, including his ten children and
their families. The first year, 1830, they traveled only as far as
Sangamon County, Illinois. There they stayed for a short time, until,
in 1831, leaving behind Jonathan and Alexander and their families,
they continued their journey towards the northwest, to what later
became Cherry Grove, Knox County, Illinois. Here there was an
abundance of prairie land, magnificent untouched forests and good
water. The choice of this land was available at the government price
of one dollar and a quarter per acre.

Six of Joseph Latimer’s children, with their families, located in
what was known as the Cherry Grove neighborhood and acted
together in the matter of school and church affairs. They built a

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

log cabin to be used as schoolhouse and church, as soon as they had
built their own houses and were settled. This, the first school to be
built in Knox County, had for a teacher Robert Bell.

In June, 1835, the Cherry Grove Cumberland Presbyterian Church
was organized at the home of Joseph Latimer with thirteen charter
members, seven of whom were Latimers.

The church and school grew together. In 1836 another building
was erected for the use of both groups. It was in this new church
building that the Cherry Grove Seminary was started in 1836 or 1837.
This school increased in size and reputation, until it had an annual
enrollment of about one hundred pupils. With expansion, new build-
ings were added and it became a boarding school, so that pupils from
distant towns could study there. Within thirty years after its organi-
zation, the founding of four or five other colleges and schools within
a short radius made it apparent that the need, which had brought
Cherry Grove Seminary into existence and made it such a valuable
part of the community, no longer existed, and consequently, in 1866,
the school closed and the library that had been collected was sent with
the good wishes of the trustees to Lincoln College. The Latimers
played a very important part in the growth of this school and many
of the children were educated within its walls.

Joseph Latimer married, at Gallatin, Tennessee, in 1795, Anna
Dobbins, who was born in South Carolina, May 10, 177 6, and died
at Cherry Grove, Illinois, February 9, 1853. Children: 1. Mary,

born in Tennessee, August 30, 1797, died near Abingdon, Illinois,
May 9, 1858; married Israel M. Marshall, born July 16, 1788, died
in Abingdon, Illinois, August 17, 1881. 2. Borodel, born March 14,
1799, died October 18, 1800. 3. Elizabeth, born in Tennessee, March
22, 1801, died at Winnebago, Minnesota, March 15, 1868; mar-
ried, in Robertson County, Tennessee, October 2, 1817, William M.
Weir, born in South Carolina, November 8, 1794, died in Robertson
County, Tennessee, October 31, 1854; removed to Minnesota. 4.
Jonathan, born in Tennessee, May 23, 1803, died at Cherry Grove,
Illinois, August 4, 1866; married, at Gallatin, Tennessee, February
27, 1827, Nancy West, born November 13, 1802, died in Cherry
Grove, October 18, 1887. 5. Sarah, born in Tennessee, May 31,

1805, died in Seattle, Washington, February 10, 1888; married
(first), in Tennessee, January 17, 1822, Richard Freeman Boren;

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

married (second), at Cherry Grove, Illinois, in 1849, John Denny;
by her second marriage she was both stepmother and mother-in-law
to her husband’s two sons, Arthur and David Denny, who were pio-
neers in founding the city of Seattle. 6. Alexander, of whom fur-
ther. 7. George Griswold, born in Tennessee, February 28, 1810,
died at Cherry Grove, February 25, 1848; married, in Sangamon
County, Illinois, October 25, 1832, Rebecca Drennan, who was born
in Illinois, February 26, 1814, and died in Cherry Grove, January
24, 1895. 8. John Carson, born in Tennessee, August 18, 1812, died
at Shenandoah, Iowa, February 13, 1898; married, in Warren County,
Illinois, January 5, 1834, Anne (Nancy Ann) Pearce. (Pearce II,
Child 1.) 9. David F., born in Tennessee, March 7, 1815, died at

Cherry Grove, November 19, 1836. 10. Susan Pauline, born at

Lebanon, Tennessee, July 19, 1817, died at Farragut, Iowa, Sep-
tember 25, 1884; married, at Cherry Grove, November 21, 1833,
Urban David Coy, born in Nelson County, Kentucky, September 14,
1810, died in Farragut, Iowa, February 10, 1876.

(Madison C. Bates: “Latimer History and Genealogy,” pp. 8-28.
Family records.)

VI. Alexander Latimer, son of Joseph and Anna (Dobbins)
Latimer, was born in Robertson County, Tennessee, September 7,
1807, and died near Winnebago, Minnesota, October 27, 1892.

Alexander Latimer moved with his father from Tennessee to Illi-
nois in 1830. He and his brother Jonathan remained in Sangamon
County, where the family had stopped before moving to Knox County.
Jonathan joined his father in Knox County in 1832, but Alexander
remained in Sangamon County for another year. While he was liv-
ing there, Mr. Latimer became acquainted with Abraham Lincoln.
He served under Lincoln’s command in the Black Hawk War, and
later kept up a friendly correspondence with him for a number of
years. Unfortunately, the letters from Lincoln, which Mr. Latimer
had very carefully saved, were destroyed in a fire which burned down
his house. The Rev. Henderson Ritchie, who married Mr. Latimer’s
eldest daughter, Mary, stated that Lincoln told him that he had often
held Mary, as a baby, and played with her. Mr. Latimer was a
farmer and a merchant.

Alexander Latimer married (first), in Tennessee, October 1,
1829, Eunice Jane Guthrie, who was born in Robertson County,

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Tennessee, October 8, 1809, and died in Cherry Grove, Illinois,
September 15, 1840. He married (second), in Illinois, March 4,
1841, Julia Ann Hart, who was born May 13, 1819, and died in
Cherry Grove, March 27, 1850. He married (third), in Illinois,
September 5, 1850, Sarah Candace Chesney, who was born August
31, 1824, and died in Seattle, Washington, May 22, 1895. By this
marriage there were five daughters. Children of the first marriage:

I. Elizabeth Ann, died August 25, 1842. 2. William Guthrie, of

whom further. 3. Mary Louise, born November 23, 1834, died May

II, 1914; married, September 3, 1856, the Rev. Henderson Ritchie,

born December 23, 1828, died at Kansas City, March 2, 1915. 4.

James Smith, born November 27, 1836, died January 27, 1893; mar-
ried, November 27, 1854, Sarah Beard. 5. Joseph McDowell, born
September 18, 1838, died September 13, 1842. 6. Robert Alexander,
born September 13, 1840, died May 3, 1843. Children of second mar-
riage: 7. Washington Kays, born November 3, 1842, died in Ander-
sonville Prison, Georgia, during the Civil War, January 23, 1865;
served with Company D, 9th Minnesota Volunteers. 8. Pleasant
Hart, born May 2, 1844, died in 1912; married, in January, 1870,
Lucy Ella Day. 9. Sarah Jane, born May 7, 1847, died in August,
1915; married, in 1868, John W. Dowdy. 10. Cordelia Ann, born
May 14, 1849, died in May, 1924; married, in January, 1870, C. M.
Phipps. Children of third marriage: 11. Narcissa Leonora, born

November 10, 1851, died in 1900, at Seattle, Washington; mar-
ried, in 1869, Orion O. Denny. 12. Eliza Alice, born September
20, 1856; married, in 1888, Charles Fowler. 13. Harriet Ellen,
born April 9, 1859; married, December 25, 1878, Charles Stephens.
14. Clara Candace, born August 10, 1861; married, in 1888, Arthur
F. Bickford. 15. Emma Chesney, born January 24, 1864; married,
in 1886, Charles Reynolds.

VII. William Guthrie Latimer, son of Alexander and Eunice Jane
(Guthrie) Latimer, was born in Galesburg, Illinois, July 24, 1832,
and died in Seattle, Washington, February 1, 1898. He was a direct
descendant of Elder William Brewster, of “Mayflower” fame, and
was educated at Hedding College, Abingdon.

William G. Latimer served in the Civil War, and was appointed
second lieutenant, Company 11, 83d Regiment, Illinois Volunteers,
by Governor Richard Yates of Illinois. He spent most of his life in

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

farming in Illinois, where he lived until 1882. In that year he settled in
Seattle and engaged in the business of buying and selling real estate. Mr.
Latimer was one of the first white men to stand on the present site of
Seattle, for in 1852 he crossed the plains with an ox team and visited
this territory. Two years later he returned to Illinois, and it was
not until 1882 that he went to Seattle. He was elected treasurer of
King County in 1887 and built the first schoolhouse in the county.

To the end of his life he was active in the Grand Army of the
Republic, serving at one time as commander of John F. Miller Post
and also of Stephen’s Post. He was widely known in Masonic circles.

William Guthrie Latimer married (first), in Abingdon, Knox
County, Illinois, January 25, i860, Martha Jane Pearce. (Pearce
IV.) The ceremony was performed by the Rev. W. Henry, minister
of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Mr. Latimer married (second)
Rosa Lynch. Children of first marriage: 1. Rosa Bonheur, born in

1861, died at Berwick, Illinois, in 1882. 2. Norval Hastings, of whom
further. 3. Vinnie, married Elmer Cassell. 4. Erie, married T. R.
Johnson. Child of second marriage: 5. Hollis, died in San Fran-

cisco, in May, 1935.

(Family records.)

VIII. Norval Hastings Latimer, son of William Guthrie and
Martha Jane (Pearce) Latimer, was born in Berwick, Illinois, May
7, 1863, and died in Seattle, Washington, November 23, 1923.

After attending the district schools near Monmouth, Illinois, until
he was about fifteen years of age, Mr. Latimer worked for about a
year on his father’s farm nearby. Then he went to Kirkwood, Illi-
nois, and accepted a position as messenger in the First National Bank.
Thus early he began the association with banking which he was to
maintain to the end of his life. Later he became a bookkeeper and
remained in that position in the same institution until 1882, when he
accompanied his parents to Seattle.

That same year he secured employment in the Dexter Horton
Company, bankers, as messenger and janitor, sweeping out the bank
and performing a variety of simple tasks. His pay was fifty dollars
a month. Six months later he was made assistant cashier and in 1889
he became manager of the bank, virtually performing all the duties
of president of the bank and cashier, as these officers were content to

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

leave them in his capable hands and devote most of their time to pri-
vate interests. In 1910 a new charter was secured for the bank and
the name was changed to the Dexter Horton National Bank, Mr.
Latimer being made president and director. Throughout the remain-
der of his life he controlled the policy and interests of this institu-
tion, one of the strong and reliable banks of the Northwest, which
carries on a banking business of very large proportions. This bank
is now known as the Seattle First National Bank.

Although this bank was the center of his interest and the recipient
of most of his time and energy, he had many other interests, both as a
banker and in other types of business activity. He was a director and
a member of the executive committee of the Dexter Horton Trust and
Savings Bank, president of the First National Bank of Port Town-
send and president of the Wauconda Investment Company, owners
of Seattle property valued at one and one-half million dollars. One
of the active organizers of the Seattle Clearing House Association,
he was chosen president for no less than sixteen consecutive terms.
He was also president of the Diamond Ice Company, the Puget Sound
Traction, Light and Power Company, and the Snoqualmie Falls Power
Company. As a banker he had great opportunities of serving his
city and State, and he made the most of them. To quote from an
article which appeared in a local publication at the time of his death:

N. H. Latimer was truly as much of a sacrifice to his love for his
country, as if he had died on the battlefield in one of the nation’s wars.
As chief executive of the Dexter Horton National Bank of Seattle
since 1889, he had a tremendous opportunity of serving his city, the
business concerns of his city and the whole Pacific Northwest. He
loved Seattle, he loved his bank and he loved his work. He rendered
very faithful service to the business circles of his city. He was one
of those men who was always working and carrying an infinite volume

of detail There are many thousands of men in business who

owe much of their success to the helping hand of Latimer. There
are thousands and thousands of other men in businesses who are grate-
ful to him for little business kindnesses, and there are hosts of others
who treasured up words and sentences of kind thoughts that he had
expressed to them.

During the World War, Mr. Latimer served as a member of the
housing committee, and as a member of the National Guard he did
military duty with the Seattle Rifles in 1890. He was at one time

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

president of the Washington State Bankers Association and was also
very active in the American Bankers Association. A life member of
the Rainier Club, he was also a life member of the Seattle Golf Club.
He was one of the founders and past commodore of the Seattle Yacht
Club, and a member of the Arctic Club, and of the Tacoma Club,
Tacoma, Washington. As for his Masonic affiliations, he was a
member of Arcana Lodge, No. 87, Free and Accepted Masons; the
Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite; the Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of
the Mystic Shrine; and one of the few thirty-third degree Masons
in the city. A regular attendant at Trinity Protestant Episcopal
Church, Mr. Latimer was an earnest and devout Christian.

Perhaps his favorite recreations of an outdoor character, and he
was very fond of all kinds of sports, were yachting and duck hunting.
Yachtsmen on the Pacific Coast remember the “Honey Boy,” a trim
cruiser he had built in Boston, Massachusetts. She was an eighty-five
footer, and Mr. Latimer intended to have her delivered by way of the
Panama Canal, but as she was needed on the coast sooner than he
had planned he had her shipped by rail instead. This entailed many
difficulties, however. In the first place it was necessary to have the
boat cut down to sixty-five feet and that it was found necessary to cut
the sides off so that she could get through the railroad tunnels. Never-
theless, the “Honey Boy” was one of the finest yachts in the North-
west. At the outbreak of the war she was turned over to the gov-
ernment for naval use.

In 1918, Mr. Latimer was a member of the commission ordered
to be sent to Japan in the interest of foreign relations. He was all
ready to leave, transportation and passports all obtained, when the
project was called off because of difficulties arising from war
conditions.

Mr. Latimer loved all types of athletics and took part in many of
them; he enjoyed the out-of-doors and spent a good deal of time at
his country place, “Norval Hall,” with its lawn and flowers. He
also had absorbed intellectual interests and hobbies; he was a great
reader and especially fond of technical books on electricity and archi-
tecture. This latter hobby bore fruit. Not only did he spend many
happy hours designing houses, but he designed the beautiful new
Dexter Horton Building and its interiors, a credit to any architect.
Early in his life in Seattle he took to collecting books and data on

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Northwestern history and had several thousand volumes on this sub-
ject, a collection of very great historical importance and value. Mrs.
Latimer is carrying on this work and seeing to the preservation of
these data. She is very active in Historical Society circles, and there
is no doubt that the results of her careful work will be of great value
in understanding the development of this section of the country.

Mr. Latimer’s family have spent the warm seasons in recent years
in their country home, “Bell Vista,” at Port Madison, Washington.

Norval Hastings Latimer married, May 22, 1890, Margaret
Moore. (Moore VII.) Children: 1. Arthur Griffith, born in Seat-
tle, February 12, 1892, a graduate of the University of Wisconsin.
During the World War he was commissioned as an ensign in the
United States Navy and served on the transport “Northern Pacific,”
making six round trips to France with troops and munitions. In col-
lege he was a member of Phi Gamma Delta Fraternity and Skull and
Crescent Honorary Society. He is a Mason and member of the Col-
lege Club, Bondmen’s Club and Rainier Club in Seattle. After a
background in commercial and investment banking he became proprie-
tor of his own investment banking firm and for many years was identi-
fied with the underwriting of worthy local securities. A lover of out-
door sports, speed boats, horses, hunting and fishing, he aspires, when
retiring from business, to develop a ranch for breeding polo ponies.
He married (first), in 1921, Mary Dudley Walker, who died in
December, 1932, daughter of Mrs. William S. Walker, of Aberdeen,
Mississippi. He married (second), Velva Stout, of Tacoma, Wash-
ington. Children of first marriage: i. Corinne, born September 2,

1923. ii. Arthur G., Jr., born October 12, 1927. 2. Chester Moore,
born May 11, 1893, attended Broadway High School, Seattle, fol-
lowed by two years at Belmont (California) Military Academy,
1909-12, where he was active in football and baseball, having been
captain of the latter team during his senior year. He was first lieu-
tenant of infantry company, member of G E K Fraternity and holder
of double scholastic honors each year. In 1915 he was graduated
with the degree of Bachelor of Philosophy from Sheffield Scientific
School, Yale University, where he was a member of the ’varsity
wrestling team for two years (weight one hundred and twenty-nine
pounds), captain during his senior year, champion lightweight wrest-
ler, and also a member of the senior student council. He enlisted in

100

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

the First Officers’ Training Camp, San Francisco, but not being among
the first called enlisted in the United States Navy for duty on subma-
rine chasers. His service record reads : Service duty with rank of

boatswain mate, first-class, Bremerton Navy Yard; commissioned
ensign, receiving highest rating in class; was assigned to staff of
Admiral Coontz, commandant of Navy Yard; took command of
subchaser No. 308 and was assigned to duty with submarine base at
San Pedro, California. He is a member of Phi Gamma Delta, the
Rainier, Arctic, Inglewood Golf and Seattle Yacht (a former direc-
tor and treasurer) clubs; a thirty-second Scottish Rite Mason; Knight
Commander, Court of Honor, 1934; treasurer of all Scottish Rite
bodies since 1925 ; and on official staff Lodge of Perfection for seven
years. He is a trustee and treasurer of Jeffs Orphan Home, trustee
of Washington Children’s Home and Ruth School for Girls, and a
former vestryman of Trinity Protestant Episcopal Church. In 1915
he began as messenger for the Dexter Horton National Bank at a
salary of thirty dollars per month, serving through various clerical
positions. In the spring of 1919 he was made assistant cashier, later
became assistant vice-president in charge of the new-business depart-
ment, and is now vice-president and a director. He married, Septem-
ber 15, 1923, in Trinity Protestant Episcopal Church, Seattle, Mil-
dred Lewis, a member of the Junior League. Children: i. Lael,

born in 1924, baptized in St. Paul’s Protestant Episcopal Church, ii.
William Lewis, born in 1926, baptized in Trinity Protestant Episco-
pal Church, iii. Chester Moore, Jr., born in 1932, baptized in Trin-
ity Protestant Episcopal Church. 3. Earl Hastings, born September
22, 1895, was graduated from Broadway High School in 1915, and
from the University of Washington with the degree of Bachelor of
Science in 1920. At high school he was president of the junior class
and of Science Club, vice-president of the freshman and sophomore
classes and the Senior Dramatic Club, chairman of the Senior Ball
Committee, member of the Midget football team, Midget track team
and Midget baseball team. In 1917 he enlisted in the aviation serv-
ice, graduating from Balloon School, Fort Omaha, Nebraska,
November 15, 1917. He was commissioned a second lieutenant in
1918, and upon completion of the course received a pilot’s license as
free balloon pilot, one of few such licenses held in this country, and
was transferred to Morrison, Virginia, in command of the 23d Bal-

101

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

loon Company. On December 24, 1918, he was graduated from
Balloon School, American Expeditionary Forces, with highest grades
ever awarded in this school. At the close of war he was placed in
command of seventy-seven men and was mustered out in New York,
April 29, 1919. After graduating from college he entered the employ
of the Dexter Horton National Bank in the collection department,
later becoming head of the contract department, and at the present
time he is head of the loan and discount department. He holds the
certificate (with honors) from the American Institute of Banking and
was sent as a representative from his bank to the Institute’s conven-
tion held in Baltimore, Maryland. He is ex-secretary of the Phi
Gamma Delta Fraternity and a thirty-second degree Mason. During
his recreational hours he delights in the study of magic, and he is a
member of the International Brotherhood of Magicians, Ring No.
59. He married, April 30, 1929, Muriel Burroughs; children: i.
John Singleton, born November 15, 1932. ii. Marlene, born Septem-
ber 3, 1935. 4. Allan Wallace, born February 25, 1899, was gradu-
ated from Broadway High School, where he was president of the
senior class and of the dramatic society in 1917, and from the Uni-
versity of Washington, College of Business Administration, in 1921;
at the university he was a member of the rowing crew during his
freshman year, and class chairman, social committee. He originated
the Junior Yacht Club, and was commodore in 1922-23. He served
during the World War in the heavy artillery. He is vice-president of
Hartley Rogers and Company, Seattle. He is a member of Phi
Gamma Delta Fraternity and a Mason. He married, in St. Paul’s
Episcopal Church, Seattle, September 1, 1923, Alice Norma Tucker,
a member of the Junior League, and they spend the summer months
in their home in Port Madison, Washington. Children: i. Joan, born
October 26, 1924. ii. Norval Hastings, II, born February 13, 1926.
iii. Marlice, born June 14, 1927. iv. Avalee, born April 10, 1931. v.
Allan Wallace, Jr., born August 3, 1932. 5. Walter Burnside, born
in Seattle, June 3, 1901, an honor graduate of Broadway High School,
and a graduate of University of Washington, junior certificate elec-
trical engineering, graduate business administration, 1923; treasurer
of senior class, chairman junior “prom” and assistant manager track
team for three years. In 1934 he received three diplomas, American
Institute of Banking courses. In 1923 he received an appointment to

102

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

the National City Company, of New York, completing a two years’
course in one and one-half years. He then returned to the employ of
the National City Company, later entering the employ of the Dexter
Horton Bank, now the First National Bank of Seattle. He is a mem-
ber of the Tennis, Yacht, College, Forty-Nine, and Washington Ath-
letic (charter member) clubs, and for two years was a member of
the committee of Junior Club and also treasurer. He is also a mem-
ber of the American Institute of Electrical Engineering, Phi Gamma
Delta Fraternity, and Trinity Protestant Episcopal Church. He
enjoys the recreational sports of tennis, hunting, swimming (long
distance), camping and mountain climbing, having climbed Mt. Rai-
nier to the summit, 14,444 feet, in record time (nine hours and forty-
five minutes). He married, in Paris, France, June 14, 1932, at the
fashionable 16" arrondissement, the Mayor of Paris being witness,
Florence Keyser, former secretary to American Ambassador Walter
Edge. 6. Ray Norval, born Easter Sunday, April 12, 1903, attended
Broadway High School and University of Oregon, for two years, and
in 1925 was graduated from the University of Washington, where
he was a member of the crew squad. During last year in college he
entered the Aviation School, completing consecutively ground school,
primary flight training, advanced training (flight), professional
examinations, and received commission in United States Naval
Reserve as naval aviator, also transport pilot rating from Depart-
ment of Commerce. His aviation record to date is: A year active
duty with Aircraft (Sand Point, Seattle) Squadrons; battle fleet,
San Diego, California; and intensive military flying and officer’s
duties, Pensacola, Florida. Upon completion of active duty and hav-
ing been transferred to reserve status, he took up commercial flying
in the interior of Alaska. He is a member of Phi Gamma Delta,
Naval Air Club of Seattle, and Reserve Officers’ Association. In
1934 he was promoted lieutenant, junior grade, United States Naval
Reserve. He is an expert riflleman and machine gunner, and his
hobbies are yachting, study of psychology, naval architecture, hunt-
ing and musical appreciation. He married, at Yuma, Arizona, in
1931, Fern Morrissey. Children: i. Sharon, ii. Calhoun, born

August 15, 1936. 7. Vernon Guthrie, born in Seattle, August

16, 1904, a graduate of the University of Washington, class of
1927. At college he was an active leader in campus activities and

103

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

was elected to the Oval Club, honorary society, in recognition of his
services to the university as an undergraduate. He is a member
of Phi Gamma Delta. He received the Bachelor of Arts degree in
Economics in 1926. He was a student on the Pioneer University
World Cruise in 1926-27, visiting forty-four foreign countries. He
was assistant cashier, Seattle branch office, New York Life Insurance
Company during 1927-29, and agency representative during 1929-34.
Founder and organizer of the Seattle Junior Chamber of Commerce
in 1930, and its first president and a director during 1931-34, he was
elected to the board of trustees of the Seattle Chamber of Commerce
in 1931, and was elected as director of the United States Junior
Chamber of Commerce in 1930 and its first president and a director
during 1931-34, to the board of trustees of the Seattle Chamber of
Commerce in 1931, and a director of the United States Junior Cham-
ber of Commerce, 1931-32. He is a member of the Washington
Athletic Club and the College Club of Seattle and formerly was a
member of the Seattle Yacht Club. He married, October 23, 1929,
Mary Potter Dudley, of Aberdeen, Washington, daughter of Lovelle
Potter and Elizabeth Benn (Crammatte) Dudley. Children: i.

Elizabeth, born in Aberdeen, Washington, October 5, 1930. ii.
Gordon Dudley, born March 27, 1936. 8. Margaret, born in Seat-

tle, July 22, 1906, was graduated from St. Nicholas School for
Girls at Seattle in 1923, and Castilleja School for Girls at Palo
Alto, California, in 1924. She attended the University of Washing-
ton, 1925-27, and the New York School of Fine and Applied Arts in
Paris, France, in 1927. She traveled extensively throughout Europe,
including sixteen countries, and visited the Panama Canal and the
Canadian Rockies in 1930. She is interested in many activities, being
a member of the Orthopedic Hospital Guild, and the Junior League
of Seattle, and is particularly interested in Braille work for the blind.
She married, February 11, 1931, at Trinity Parish Church, Charles
Preston Callahan, born in Auckland, New Zealand, October 17, 1901,
son of Charles Joseph Callahan. Charles Preston Callahan held the
rank of junior deck officer in the cadet division of the merchant marine
during the World War, and has since been continuously associated
with the A. G. Manufacturing Company. Children: i. Charles Lati-
mer Callahan, born in Seattle, Washington, October 30, 1932, chris-
tened Easter Sunday, April 16, 1933, in Trinity Parish Church, ii.
Margaret Susan, born January 7, 1936.

104

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

The death of Norval Hastings Latimer on November 23, 1923,
after a long struggle against ill health that began on October 15, 1921,
with a stroke of paralysis, marked the loss of a man who, for over
forty years, had been associated with banking in Seattle, Washington,
and who had enjoyed the great privilege of watching at first hand the
development of that city from pioneer beginnings and of aiding it to
become a great and flourishing city. Not only as a power in banking,
but as an individual who by his personality and force of character did
much to influence his acquaintances and fellow-citizens, he left his
mark on this city. Its business, civic and social life, its clubs and intel-
lectual circles were all touched by his life which was many-sided, but
suffered no loss of attainment thereby. With his death another man
who had watched one of the historic dramas of American life played
out, who spanned the period from pioneer days to the present, and
who took so active a part in that drama, was lost to Seattle. The
years that have passed have only made more evident his many fine
qualities and the magnitude of his contribution to the life of the city.

(Family data.)

(The Denison Line)

Denison and its variants, Dennis, Denniss, Denis, Dennison, Den-
nisson, and Denyson, are taken from the baptismal name, “the son of
Denis.” Crossing over from France, both the masculine and femi-
nine forms, Denis and Denise, were in common usage, as this font-
name was very popular for a while, especially in Yorkshire and the
North, and has left its mark in such familiar surnames as Dyson,
Denny, Dennett, Dyatt, Dyett, and Dye, apart from the list given
above. Tennyson and Tenison are also variants. Denison and Deny-
son are the forms which are usually found in the old English records,
such as the parish registers of Stortford, Hertfordshire. The ances-
tors of the Denisons were probably Huguenots, who resided in Flan-
ders, migrating from there to England. The later descendants of
George Denison adopted the spelling Dennison.

(Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.” A. L.
Dennison: “Dennison Family,” p. 6.)

Arms — Argent, on a chevron engrailed gules, between three torteaux, an annulet or.

Crest — A dexter arm embowed, vested vert, the hand proper grasping a scimitar.

Motto — Domus grata. (Matthews: “American Armoury.”)

I. William, Denison, son of John and Agnes Denison or Deny-
son, was baptized at Stortford, England, February 3, 1571, and died

105

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

at Roxbury, Massachusetts, January 25, 1653. According to the
inscription on his tombstone, he was a Master of Arts, and since two
of his sons were graduates of the University of Cambridge, it is pos-
sible that he received his education there also. In 1631 he sailed for
New England on the ship “Lion,” with his wife and children, except
the eldest son, who remained in England. They located at Roxbury,
Massachusetts, where he became a leader in civic and religious affairs.
His name is third on the list of the founders of the First Church of
that town, which was organized about 1632, with John Eliot as pas-
tor. He was also a founder of the free school of Roxbury. He was
one of the first deacons of the church and in 1634 was a constable and
a deputy to the General Court. A list of early freeholders shows that
he possessed two hundred and sixty-seven acres of land. In 1637 he
and his son, Edward, were among several other Roxbury men who
were disarmed for “seditious libel,” because they were followers of
Anne Hutchinson, the religious leader, who drew many of the more
intelligent to her way of thinking.

William Denison married, at Stortford, Hertfordshire, England,
November 7, 1603, Margaret Monck, also described as the Widow
Chandler, who died at Roxbury, Massachusetts, February 23, 1645.
Children: 1. John, baptized at Stortford, April 7, 1605; educated

at Cambridge; remained in England when the family migrated to
America; vicar of Stanton, Hertfordshire, 1660-70. 2. William, bap-
tized October 5, 1606; a soldier at the siege of Breda, Holland. 3.
George, baptized October 15, 1609, buried in 1615. 4. Daniel, born
October 18, 1612, died in 1682; was graduated from Cambridge
University, England; accompanied his parents to Massachusetts,
where he became major-general of militia ; was Speaker of the House
of Representatives and for twenty-nine-years was one of the assistants ;
his autobiography, preserved by descendants and published in the
“New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” is the author-
ity for identifying the family with the Denisons of Stortford; mar-
ried Patience Dudley, a daughter of Governor Dudley. 5. Edward,
baptized November 2, 1616, died April 26, 1668; accompanied his
parents to Massachusetts, and resided at Roxbury; married Elizabeth
Welde. 6. Sarah, born and died in 1615. 7. George, of whom

further.

(J. L. Glascock: “Pedigree of Denison,” in “New England His-
torical and Genealogical Register,” Vol. XLVI, pp. 352-54. Drake:
“History of Roxbury, Massachusetts,” pp. 50, 90-91.)

106

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

II. Captain George Denison, son of William and Margaret
(Monck-Chandler) Denison, was baptized at Stortford, Hertford-
shire, England, December io, 1620, died at Hartford, Connecticut,
October 24, 1694, and was buried in the Center Street Churchyard
there. He accompanied his parents to America and resided with
them at Roxbury, Massachusetts. Shortly after the death of his
first wife, in 1643, he returned to England and served under Crom-
well, taking part in the battle of York, or Marston Moor. After
being wounded at Naseby, he was nursed back to health in the home
of John Borodell, whose daughter he later married as his second wife.
In 1645 he returned to Roxbury, where he resided until 1651, when he
removed to Connecticut. From 1651 to 1654 he was in New London
and in 1652 he was granted two hundred acres of land in the Pequot-
se-pos Valley at Mystic. (The name of the town was later changed
to Stonington.) During King Philip’s War he was a captain under
Major Robert Treat and took part in the Great Swamp Fight of
December 19, 1675. The following year he was in command of the
forces which pursued the remnant of the Narragansett and Wampa-
noag Indians, and succeeded in defeating them, capturing Chief
Cononchet, who was brought to Stonington. He also assisted as mag-
istrate to enable the Pequot chiefs, designated by the English, to con-
trol the remainder of their tribe. The house, which was later known
as the Oliver Denison house, was built in 1663, and stood a few feet
west of what was the residence of Mr. and Mrs. Reuben Ford in
l8"-

Captain George Denison married (first), about 1640, Bridget
Thompson, born September 11, 1622, died in 1643; he married (sec-
ond), probably in England, Ann Borodell, died September 26, 1712,
aged ninety-seven, and was buried at Stonington, Connecticut, in Elm
Grove Cemetery. She was the daughter of John Borodell. Children
by first marriage: 1. Sarah, born March 20, 1641 ; married Thomas
Stanton, Jr., of Stonington. 2. Hannah, born May 20, 1643; mar-
ried (first), in 1659, Nathaniel Chesbro; married (second), July
15, 1680, Captain Joseph Saxton, of Stonington. Children by sec-
ond marriage: 3. John, of whom further. 4. Ann, born May 20,

1649; married, November 28, 1667, Deacon Gresham Palmer, of
Stonington. 5. Borodell (twin), born in 1651; married, June 16,
1680, Samuel Stanton, of Stonington. 6. George (twin), born in

107

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

1651, died December 27, 1711; resided at Westerly, Rhode Island;
married Mercy Gorham. 7. William, born in 1655, died at Stoning-
ton, March 26, 1715; married Sarah Stanton. 8. Margaret, born
in 1657; married, June 5, 1676, James Brown, Jr., of Swansea, Mas-
sachusetts. 9. Mercy, born in 1659, died March 10, 1671.

(R. A. Wheeler: “History of Stonington, Connecticut,” pp. 336-
338. J. D. Baldwin and W. Clift: “Descendants of Captain George
Denison,” pp. 6-8, 11, 14, 175, 231.)

III. Captain John Denison, son of Captain George and Ann
(Borodell) Denison, was born July 14, 1646, and died in 1698. Elis
will is dated April 26, 1698, and the inventory which accompanies it
shows that the estate was valued at £509 12s. iod. At the time of
his marriage to Phebe Lay the parents of each conveyed them land,
Captain Denison granting them a farm near the mouth of the Mys-
tic River, in Stonington, while Robert Lay gave them the house and
land at Saybrook, which he had purchased of John Post. The old
Denison house at Stonington was built by either Captain John or his
father. It is mentioned in the diary of Thomas Miner as being moved
a short time before his death. It held at least six generations of Cap-
tain John’s descendants.

Captain John Denison married, November 26, 1667, Phebe Lay,
born in 1650 and died in 1699, daughter of Robert and Sarah Lay,
of Saybrook, Connecticut. Children: 1. John, Jr., born January
1, 1669, died at Saybrook, Connecticut, in 1699; married, in 1690,
Ann Mason, daughter of Captain John Mason. 2. George, of whom
further. 3. Robert, born September 7, 1673; resided at Mohegan,
now called Montville, Connecticut; married, in 1696, Joanna Stan-
ton. 4. William, born April 7, 1677, died January 30, 1730; resided
at North Stonington, Connecticut; married, in 1698, Mary Avery.
5. Daniel, born March 28, 1680, died October 13, 1747; resided
at Stonington, Connecticut, and was a deacon there; married
(first), January 1, 1703, Mary Stanton; married (second), October
27, 1726, Jane Cogswell. 6. Samuel, born February 23, 1683, died
May 12, 1683. 7. Ann, born October 3, 1684; married (first) Sam-
uel Minor, and (second) Edward Denison, of Westerly, Rhode
Island. 8. Phebe, baptized April 6, 1690; married Ebenezer Bill-
ings, Jr. 9. Sarah, born July 20, 1692; married Isaac Williams.

(J. D. Baldwin and W. Clift: “Descendants of Captain George
Denison,” pp. 17, 34, 60, 84, 120, 311-13, 315.)

108

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

IV. George Denison, son of Captain John and Phebe (Lay)

Denison, was born March 28, 1671, and died January 22, 1726. He
was graduated from Harvard in 1693, and resided in New London,
Connecticut, where he served as town clerk, county clerk and clerk of
probate. George Denison married, in 1694, Mary (Wetherell) Har-
ris, who died in 17 11, widow of Thomas Harris, daughter of Daniel
and Grace (Brewster) Wetherell, granddaughter of Jonathan and
Lucretia (Oldham) Brewster, and great-granddaughter of Elder Wil-
liam Brewster, famous “Mayflower” Pilgrim. Children: 1. Grace,

born in 1694. 2. Phebe, born in 1697. 3. Hannah, born in 1699.
4. Borrodil, or Borodel, of whom further. 5. Daniel, born in 1703.
6. Wetherell, born in 1705. 7. Ann, born in 1707. 8. Sarah, born

in 1709.

(Ibid. W. R. Cutter: “Genealogical and Family History of

Connecticut,” Vol. I, p. 176. Family records.)

V. Borrodil or Borodel Denison, daughter of George and Mary
(Wetherell-Harris) Denison, was born in 1701. She married Jona-
than (1) Latimer. (Latimer III.)

(Ibid.)

(The Griswold Line)

Arms — Argent, a fesse gules between two greyhounds courant sable.

Crest — A greyhound passant proper.

Motto — Volando reptilia sperno. (Crozier: “General Armory.”)

I. Matthew (1) Griswold, the second son of George Griswold,
was born about 1618 or 1620 in Kenilworth, Warwickshire, England,
where the family was seated for many generations. In 1684 he calls
himself “66 years old.” He died at Lyme, Connecticut, in January,
1698-99.

He came to this country in 1639 and settled in Connecticut, first
at Windsor, and later at Saybrook, in that part of the latter settle-
ment which later became known as Lyme. He was frequently repre-
sentative of Saybrook and later of Lyme and became a large
landowner.

Matthew ( 1 ) Griswold married Ann Wolcott, daughter of Henry
and Elizabeth (Saunders) Wolcott. Henry Wolcott was of Dorches-
ter, Massachusetts, in 1630. Children, order of birth not known:
1. Matthew (2), of whom further. 2. John, died young. 3. Eliza-
beth, died in July, 1727; married (first), October 17, 1670, John

109

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Rogers, of New London, Connecticut; (second), August 5, 1679,
Peter Pratt; (third) Matthew Beckwith. 4. Ann, married, Septem-
ber 2, 1674, Abraham Brunson, of Farmington, Connecticut. 5.
Sarah, married Captain Thomas Colton, of Springfield.

(James Savage: “Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers

of New England,” Vol. II, p. 317; Vol. IV, p. 620. E. E. Salisbury:
“The Griswold Family of Connecticut,” in “Magazine of American
History,” Vol. II. Family records.)

II. Matthew (2) Griswold, son of Matthew (1) and Ann (Wol-
cott) Griswold, was born in 1653 and died January 15, 1716, “aged
63.” He was a resident of Lyme, Connecticut.

Matthew (2) Griswold married (first), May 21, 1683, Phebe
Hyde, daughter of Samuel Hyde, of Norwich, Connecticut. She died
in 1704. He married (second), after May 30, 1705, Mary, widow
of Thomas Lee; she died October 27, 1724, “aged 68.” Children
of first marriage: 1. Phebe, born August 15, 1684. 2- Elizabeth,

born November 19, 1685. 3. Sarah, born March 19, 1687. 4. Mat-
thew, born September 15, 1688. 5. John, born December 22, 1690,

whose son was Governor Matthew Griswold, of Connecticut, who, in
turn, was the father of Governor Roger Griswold, of Connecticut. 6.
George, of whom further. 7. Mary, born April 22, 1694. 8. Debo-

rah. 9. Samuel, who died January 10, 1728, “aged 29.” 10. Thomas,
who died June 27, 1716. 11. Patience.

(Ibid.)

III. Rev. George Griswold, son of Matthew (2) and Phebe
(Hyde) Griswold, was born August 13, 1692, in Lyme, Connecticut,
and died October 14, 1761. He was graduated from Yale College
with the degree of Bachelor of Arts in 1717. His name heads the list
of members of his class, five in number, and he was graduated with
second honors and as salutatorian of his class; his oration, in his own
handwriting, is said to be the oldest Yale College document of its sort
known to exist. He became the first pastor of the Lyme Second
Society Church, serving from 1719 to 1761.

Rev. George Griswold married (first), June 22, 1725, Hannah
Lynde, daughter of Nathaniel Lynde, of Saybrook, Connecticut, and
a descendant of the distinguished English Roman Catholic family of
Digby. (Royal Descent from Charlemagne XXXVIII.) He mar-

1 10

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

ried (second), July 20, 1736, his cousin, Elizabeth Lee, granddaugh-
ter of Thomas Lee, of Lyme, Connecticut. Children of first mar-
riage: 1. George. 2. Rev. Sylvanus. 3. Elizabeth, married John

Raymond, of Montville, Connecticut. 4. Lucretia, of whom further.
Children of second marriage: 5. Samuel. 6. Andrew. 7. A daugh-
ter. 8. A daughter.

(E. E. Salisbury: “The Griswold Family of Connecticut,” in

“Magazine of American History,” Vol. II. Family records.)

IV. Lucretia Griswold, daughter of Rev. George and Hannah
(Lynde) Griswold, was born at Lyme, Connecticut, March 26, 1731.
She married Colonel Jonathan (2) Latimer. (Latimer IV.)

(Ibid.)

(The Pearce Line)

Pearce, with Pierce, Pearse, Peers, and other variations, is derived
from the Old French Pierre and the Old English Piers, meaning
Peter. This old name was widespread in England, and is found again
and again in old records. As early as 1379, Magota Peres-wyf and
Isolda Peerdoghter appear in Yorkshire. In the time of Elizabeth we
have Robert Pearce. In 1601 William Pearce is registered at the
University of Oxford, and in 1738 Thomas Pearce married Eliza-
beth Jones.

(Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

Arms — Gules, on a bend between two cotises or, an annulet sable.

(Burke: “Encyclopaedia of Heraldry.”)

I. Thomas (1) Pearce, first of the line of whom we have record,
was born in Maryland, February 11, 1745, and died in Urbana,
Champaign County, Ohio, June 15, 1826.

According to family tradition and records, Thomas ( 1 ) Pearce
was the son of Jeremiah and Deborah (Allen) Pearce, and was a
descendant of Rev. Everardus and Anneke Jans Bogardus. The line
of descent, according to these sources and the several additional ref-
erences quoted, was as follows:

I. Anneke Jans, born about 1607-08, died in 1663, according to
tradition, for which, however, no documentary proof has ever been
found, was the daughter of Wolfert and Catharine or Tryntje
(Jonas) Webber. Wolfe-rt Webber is said to have been the son of
William the Silent, Prince of Orange, and later William I of Holland,
from a morganatic marriage to a lady whose name is not known.

Ill

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Anneke Jans married (first), about 1620, Jan Roeloffsen, and
(second), in 1638, Rev. Everardus Borgadus, a native of Holland,
who came to this country in 1633, and was one of the first clergymen
in New Netherland (New York). Her first husband had received
from Governor Van Twiller a grant of sixty-two acres of land on
lower Manhattan Island, now and for many years past in the posses-
sion of Trinity Protestant Episcopal Church, New York City.

II. Willem Bogardus, son of Rev. Everardus and Anneke Jans
Bogardus, married, August 29, 1659, Wyntje Sybrant.

III. Anna Bogardus, daughter of Willem and Wyntje (Sybrant)
Bogardus, married, January 29, 1682, Jacob Brouwer or Brower.

IV. Adam Brouwer or Brower, son of Jacob and Anna (Bogar-
dus) Brouwer or Brower, married, July 13, 1717, Deborah Allen,
daughter of George and Elizabeth Allen. He came to Monmouth
County, New Jersey, and settled in the vicinity of Farmingdale.

V. Deborah Brouwer, or Brower, daughter of Adam and Deborah
(Allen) Brouwer or Brower, married, November 25, 1755, Jeremiah
Pearce. They were the parents of six sons and one daughter, the
known sons being Job E., Jeremiah, Thomas, Adam, and John.

VI. Thomas Pearce, son of Jeremiah and Deborah (Brouwer or
Brower) Pearce, married, January 13, 1780, Mary Barns, daughter
of Joseph Barns, of Shepardstown, Virginia.

(Family records in the possession of George T. Pearce, of Glad-
stone, Illinois. “New York Genealogical and Biographical Record,”
Vol. LV, pp. 201-43. E. Salter: “History of Monmouth and Ocean
Counties, New Jersey,” p. xiii.)

Statements have been made that Thomas ( 1 ) Pearce was born in
New York State, and Revolutionary service in New York has been
credited to him. Other records state that he lived in Frederick
County and served in the Revolution from that part of Maryland.
No mention of a Thomas Pearce, however, is found in the tax lists
or church records of Frederick County. Later records would seem
to prove that he was born in Maryland and was living in Kent County
during the Revolution.

His military record is given as follows : “Kent County Militia,

1778. Thomas Pearce, Private, 1st Class. Captain Peregrine
Brown, 6th Company, Col. Richard Graves, 13th Battalion.”
“Thomas Pearce, Private, 6th Company, 1778. Captain John Day.”

1 12

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

In 1797 Thomas ( 1 ) Pearce removed to Kentucky, where he lived
for several years. In 1801 he removed to Ohio and settled on land
now occupied by the city of Urbana. There he built his home and
there his son, Milton, was born in 1803, the first white child born in
that section. It was on the land where he cleared his fields that the
present Monument Square and the business section of the city of
Urbana now stand.

Several records of business transactions are found for Thomas
(1) Pearce, among them one in which, on June 22, 1816, he and his
wife Elizabeth deeded to George Stockton, of Fleming County, Ken-
tucky, a survey made January 11, 1811, for eighty acres on Military
Warrant 5263. This would indicate that their place of residence in
Kentucky had been Fleming County.

After his death, on the twentieth day of June term of Court, 1826,
Harvey Pearce and Milton Pearce, his sons, were appointed adminis-
trators of the estate of “Thomas Pearce, Sr.”

Thomas (1) Pearce married (first), in Maryland, January 1,
1768, Mary Barnes; and (second), in Kentucky, July 7, 1799, Eliza-
beth Collins. Children of first marriage: 1. Joseph. 2. Lewis. 3.

Elizabeth. 4. Thomas (2), of whom further. 5. James. 6. John,
married, October 4, 1806, Elizabeth Stewart. 7. Jane. 8. Jesse,
married Nancy. 9. Mary. 10. Andrew, married, September 8,
1825, Malinda Lewis. Children of second marriage: 11. William,

born in Kentucky in 1801. 12. Milton, born in Ohio in 1803. 13.

Harvey Collins, born in Ohio in 1805, died in 1891 ; married, in 1831,
Beulah Barrett, born in 1809, died in 1885. 14. Clarissa, born in

1807. 15. Wesley, born in 1809; in 1827 chose John Wallace as his

guardian. 16. Rhuey (Rhea), born in 1812; she and her younger
sister, Sarah, chose St. Ledger Neal as their guardian in November,
1828. 17. Sarah, born in 1815.

(B. F. Bowen and Company: “History of Champaign County,

Ohio,” Vol. II, p. 402. “D. A. R. Lineage Books,” Vol. LXXXVIII,
National Number 87417, p. 127. J. F. Brennan: “Biographical

Cyclopedia and Portrait Gallery, State of Ohio,” p. 391. G. A. Han-
son: “History of Old Kent,” p. 363. “Index to Revolutionary War
Militia Lists of Maryland,” at the Maryland Historical Society, pp.
72-91. “Unpublished Revolutionary Records of Maryland,” com-
piled by the Baltimore Chapter of the D. A. R., Vol. II, pp. 174, 210.
“U. S. Census of Maryland,” p. 47. “Champaign County, Ohio,

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Miscellaneous Records,” AA, pp. 159, 161. “Champaign County,
Ohio, Minutes of Court of Common Pleas,” Vol. XII, p. 353; Vol.
XIII, pp. 26, 228. “Champaign County, Ohio, Deed Records,” C,
p. 45; F, pp. 466, 525, 625; G, 274. “Champaign County, Ohio,
Marriage Records,” A, p. 4; B, p. 234.)

II. Thomas (2) Pearce, son of Thomas (1) and Mary (Barnes)
Pearce, was born, probably in Maryland, and died in Warren County,
Illinois, August 22, 1853, aged, according to the inscription on his
tombstone at Berwick, Illinois, “seventy-four years, eleven months
and twenty-seven days.” He removed to Kentucky with his father
in 1797, and from there to Champaign County, Ohio, in 1801, set-
tling where Urbana now stands. By 1833, and perhaps before that
year, he had removed to Warren County, Illinois, where he spent the
rest of his life. It is possible that he lived in Pekin, Tazewell County,
Illinois, for a short time about 1830, as his son Andrew is said to
have been there at that time.

Thomas (2) Pearce was a private in the War of 1812; he is on
the muster roll of First Company of Spies under command of Captain
Christopher Wood, attached to a brigade of Ohio troops under com-
mand of Brigadier-General Edward W. Tupper, from September 4,
1812, to March 2, 1813. His service began October 22, 1812, and
expired February 5, 1813, when he was discharged “sick.”

A deed is recorded November 22, 1815, stating that on December
27, 1814, Charles Arbuckle and Esther of Greenbrier County, Vir-
ginia, deeded to John Cartmell and Thomas Pearce for “$5 lawful
money of Virginia, % of a tract containing 500 acres. Survey 3424.”
Several other transactions concerning this land are recorded. On
May 9, 1820, “Benjamin Cheny, Thomas Pearce, Jr., and John Cart-
mell all of Champaign County; whereas they purchased jointly a five
hundred acre tract, Virginia Military Land Survey, No. 3428 ; Agree-
ment: Benjamin Cheny’s part 125 acres, part; Thomas Pearce,

Jr., s’ part to be of the % to stakes, etc., including his buildings
and place where he now lives . . . . , etc.” On May 2, 1827, Ben-
jamin Cheny and Sarah sold to Thomas Pearce, 3434 acres. In 1833,
after Thomas and his wife, Phebe, had removed to Warren County,
Illinois, they conveyed all their land to John Cartmell; the 187^
acres conveyed in December, 1814, and the 34 acres conveyed in
1827, all for $1,250.

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

The original will of Thomas (2) Pearce is on file in the War-
ren County, Illinois, Courthouse, with the final report of the execu-
tors. The will is dated February 1, 1851, and was probated Sep-
tember 20, 1853. He named as executors, “My son Andrew G.
Pearce, my son-in-law John C. Latimore and Ivory Quimby.” Among
other bequests were: “unto my wife Phebe Pearce during her natu-
ral life .... one third part of all my estate ” “I give and

bequeath the remaining two thirds of my estate to my son Andrew
G. Pearce, and my daughters Matilda Barret, Nancy Latimore, Mary
E. Quimby and Sarah Temperance Pearce.” He also made provision
for some grandchildren, children of a deceased son and two daugh-
ters. The appraisal list of personal property, on October 14, 1853,
included a spinning wheel, a buggy wagon, one two-horse wagon, one
log wagon, one high horned cow, some oats and corn.

Thomas (2) Pearce married twice; the name of his first wife is
not known. He married (second), July 4, 1815, Phebe (Little)
George, widow of William George, whom she had married February

3, 1814. By her first husband she had a son, William Francis George,

born early in 1815; he married Nancy and lived in Warren County,
Illinois. Phebe (Little-George) Pearce died in Monmouth, War-
ren County, Illinois, January 29, 1869. In her will she devised to
her daughters, Mary E. Quimby, Sarah T. Whitenack, and her step-
daughter, Anne Latimer, share and share alike. At the close of the
final distribution of the estate there is a record that “There is a legacy
unsettled in the State of New Jersey of $300, due to the estate of
testatrix by the will of her mother Sarah Collins, and that the will has
been disputed and has been in the law undetermined, etc.” This
would seem to prove that Phebe Little had been born in New Jersey
and that after her father’s death her mother had married (second)
a Mr. Collins. Child of first marriage of Thomas (2) Pearce: 1.

Anne (Nancy Ann), born before 1815; married John Carson Lati-
mer. (Latimer V, Child 8.) Children of second marriage: 2.

Andrew G., of whom further. 3. Matilda, married a Mr. Barret.

4. Mary E., married a Mr. Quimby. 5. Sarah Temperance, married
W. W. Whitenack. 6. A son, deceased by 1851.

(B. F. Bowen and Company: “History of Champaign County,

Ohio,” Vol. II, p. 402. “D. A. R. Lineage Books,” Vol. LXXXVIII,
National Number 87417, p. 127. Copy of Original Record in the

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Archives of the Adjutant General’s Office in Washington, D. C.
(“War of 1812, Records”). “Champaign County, Ohio, Deed Rec-
ords,” B, p. 407; E, p. 350; H, p. 49; L, p. 80; N, p. 339. “Cham-
paign County, Ohio, Miscellaneous Records,” AA, p. 209. “Cham-
paign County, Ohio, Marriage Records,” A, pp. 44, 48. “Warren
County, Illinois, Courthouse Records.”)

III. Andrew G. Pearce, son of Thomas (2) and Phebe (Little-
George) Pearce, was born in Champaign County, Ohio, November
16, 1816. He went to Pekin, Tazewell County, Illinois, in 1830, and
a year later removed to Berwick Township, Warren County, Illinois.

Andrew G. Pearce married, May 28, 1840, Eliza Powers, born
near Cincinnati, Ohio, January 19, 1819, living in Berwick, Illinois,
in 1887, daughter of Aaron and Martha (Colby) Powers. Aaron
Powers died in Greenbush Township, Warren County, March 26,
1862. Children: 1. Martha Jane, of whom further. 2. Theo-
dore C., born March 9, 1843. 3. Mary C., born March 18, 1848.

4. George T., born July 1, 1855.

(Chapman Brothers: “Portrait and Biographical Album of War-
ren County, Illinois,” p. 354. “Knox County, Marriage Records,
Galesburg, Illinois.”)

IV. Martha Jane Pearce, daughter of Andrew G. and Eliza
(Powers) Pearce, was born in Warren County, Illinois, March 28,
1841, and died at Kirkwood, Illinois, before 1876.

Martha Jane Pearce attended school in Berwick, Illinois, and
Hedding College in Abingdon, Illinois. At the age of twelve she
joined the Methodist Episcopal Church.

She married William Guthrie Latimer. (Latimer VII.)

(Ibid. Family records.)

(The Moore Line)

The locality near a moor began the evolution of the surname
Moore for those who resided in such places, and the early English
records contain the name under various spellings. According to the
Hundred Rolls, John atte Mor was living in County Norfolk in 1273.
His contemporaries in other counties were Adam Atte Mor, County
Oxford; Fulco de la More, County Hunts; Pontius de la More,
County York.

(Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

116

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Arms — Azure, on a chief indented or, three mullets pierced gules.

Crest — Out of a ducal coronet or, a Moor’s head and shoulders in profile sable, wreathed
about the temples. (Burke: “General Armory.”)

I. Samuel ( i) Moore, who was born probably in England, died at
Woodbridge, New Jersey, May 27, 1688. He was a resident of
Newbury, Massachusetts, before 1653, and two of his marriages are
recorded there. About 1666, soon after the Province of New Jer-
sey was ceded by the Duke of York to John, Lord Berkeley, and to
Sir George Carteret, Samuel ( 1 ) Moore established himself at
Woodbridge, New Jersey, filing in that place and in Piscataway
Township a survey for a number of tracts of land. December 27,
1667, a patent for seventy acres of land was assigned to him at a
yearly rental of a half penny sterling per acre. Part of this tract,
located at what is now Lower Rahway, remained in possession of the
family until the latter part of the nineteenth century. His mansion
with its land extended over sixteen acres.

Samuel ( 1 ) Moore became a man of influence and much prestige
at Woodbridge. He served for nineteen years as the town clerk,
being the second incumbent of that post at Woodbridge. He was
made deputy to the General Assembly and returned to that office five
times. In 1668 he was chosen delegate to the first Legislature held
in the Province of New Jersey at Elizabethtown. He assisted in
laying out land in 1669, being aid to the surveyor general, and was
appointed constable that same year. The next year he held the post
of overseer of the highway, from 1672 to 1687 he served as rate
maker, and he was rate gatherer from 1675 until 1679, and again in
1683. He was elected a moderator for one year, and served as assist-
ant justice of the township court from 1669 to 1671 and from 1675
to 1680-81. A large grant of three hundred and fifty-six acres was
made him in 1670, while his brother Matthew, who had also come
from Newbury, received one hundred and seventy-seven acres. The
honor of the presidency of the township court came to him in 1672,
and he retained the post until 1674. He served during 1672-73 as
marshal of the Province under Governor Carteret and also for sev-
eral years as treasurer of the Province of East Jersey, the salary for
the latter post yielding him nine pence per pound. In the military
forces he held the rank of lieutenant.

In appreciation for some signal public services, the nature of
which does not appear on the old records, a dispatch was sent on

1 17

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

December 7, 1672, by the proprietors of Whitehall, to the Governor,
the Council, and the Receiver General, ordering for Samuel ( 1 )
Moore a payment annually of ten pounds for the next seven years
and authorizing them to give him sixty acres of upland for each per-
son in his family, in addition to the land he already had taken up as
a settler; a proportionate amount of meadowland was also ordered
to be donated to him. His popularity grew steadily, and in 1683 he
was appointed high sheriff for Middlesex County, at that time a posi-
tion of great dignity and much responsibility. He was also for a time
messenger for the House of Deputies. He was made overseer of the
poor in 1682, and during that same year an Act of Legislature
invested him with the office of commissioner for laying out highways,
bridges, landings, and fences in Middlesex County.

In June, 1683, “by a unanimous vote he was made choice of to
keep ordinary for this towne.” This was the first tavern set up at
Woodbridge.

Samuel (1) Moore married (first), May 3, 1653, in Newbury,
Massachusetts, Hannah Plummer, who died December 8, 1654; he
married (second), in Newbury, December 12, 1656, Mary Ilsley,
born about 1638, died after June 3, 1678, at Woodbridge, New Jer-
sey, daughter of William and Barbara Ilsley, of Newbury. He mar-
ried (third), December 23, 1678, Anne Jaques (or Jaquish). Chil-
dren of second marriage, born at Woodbridge, New Jersey: 1. Eliza-
beth, born July 20, 1668. 2. Samuel, born March 31, 1670; married
(first), October 26, 1693, Sarah Higgins; married (second), June
2, 1718, Mary Harrison. 3. Thomas, born July 26, 1672; married
December 25, 1699, Mary White. 4. John, of whom further. 5.
Enoch, a twin, born June 3, 1678. 6. Francis, a twin, born June 3,

1678; adopted by Simon Rouse, of Rahway, New Jersey, originally
of Duxbury, Massachusetts. Child by third marriage: 7. Sarah,

born September 16, 1681, died in January, 1688.

(Ambrose M. Shotwell: “Annals of Our Colonial Ancestors and
Their Descendants,” pp. 18-24. James Savage: “Genealogical Dic-
tionary of New England,” Vol. Ill, p. 231. Rev. Joseph W.
Dally: “Woodbridge, New Jersey, and Vicinity,” pp. 28, 29, 36, 95,
100, 109, 336-38. “Vital Records of Newbury, Massachusetts,”
Vol. I, pp. 325-665 ; Vol. II, pp. 337-38.)

II. John Moore, son of Samuel (1) and Mary (Ilsley) Moore,
was born at Woodbridge, New Jersey, May 20, 1674. An item in the

1 18

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

old records shows that about 1714 John Moore and John Kinsey, pur-
suant to an act of the General Assembly, were chosen to cooperate
with the justices in respect to the building of a gaol and a courthouse.

John Moore married (first), March 18, 1699, Hope Robinds,
born at Woodbridge, New Jersey, December 10, 1681, daughter of
Daniel and Hope Robinds. He married (second), in Woodbridge,
New Jersey, November 21, 1717, Mary Oliver. Children of first
marriage: 1. John, born at Freehold, New Jersey, December 3, 1700.
2. Joseph, born October 5, 1703. 3. Benjamin, born at Elizabeth-

town, New Jersey, October 10, 1705; married, between the 21st of
the first month and the 18th of the second month, 1750, Elizabeth
Shotwell, who died the 31st of the 9th month, 1750, daughter of Dan-
iel and Elizabeth Shotwell, of Staten Island. 4. Enoch, born Decem-
ber 7, 1707, died December 18, 1755; married, 6th month, 1735,
Grace Brotherton. 5. Samuel (2), of whom further. 6. Daniel,
born August 24, 17 11. 7. Rachael, born October 15, 1713. Chil-
dren of second marriage: 8. Mary, born January 17, 1718-19. 9.

William, born August 30, 1720. 10. Hannah, born March 31, 1722.

11. John, born May 13, 1725. 12. Deborah, born March 28, 1727.

13. Sarah, born December 6, 1728.

(Ambrose M. Shotwell: “Annals of Our Colonial Ancestors and
Their Descendants,” p. 19. Rev. Joseph W. Dally: “Woodbridge,
New Jersey, and Vicinity,” pp. 338, 339.)

III. Samuel (2) Moore, son of John and Hope (Robinds)
Moore, was born, probably in Woodbridge Township, April 4, 1709,
and died at Rahway, New Jersey, about 1751. He followed the call-
ing of carpenter and later became a merchant in Lower Rahway.

Samuel (2) Moore married, about 1729, Mary, who died 17th
of 5th month, 18 11, aged ninety-seven years. It is believed that she
came from Holland. Mary Moore married (second) a Mr. Elston
or Alston, a widower, and (third), a man named Hays. A manu-
script in possession of the New Jersey Historical Society calls her
“the widow Alston,” upon her marriage to Samuel (2) Moore. Chil-
dren: 1. Mary (Polly), married Morris DeCamp. 2. Joseph, born

at Rahway, New Jersey, January 9, 1731, died 6-10-1793; married,
21-2010.-1751, Christiana Bishop. 3. Edward, born November 6,

1 733 , died at Rahway, New Jersey, 8-3010.-1822. 4. Sarah, born

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

July 31, 1735. 5. Isaac, born July 10, 1737. 6. John, born May 1 1,
r739- 7- Samuel (3), of whom further.

(Ambrose M. Shotwell: “Annals of Our Colonial Ancestors and
Their Descendants,” pp. 20-23. Rev. Joseph W. Dally: “Wood-

bridge, New Jersey, and Vicinity,” p. 338.)

IV. Samuel (3) Moore, son of Samuel (2) and Mary Moore,
was born at Rahway, New Jersey, April 4, 1742, and died in 1820,
“aged 80,” in Norwich, Ontario, Canada. By request he became a
member, 16-1 11110.-1774, of the Friends Monthly Meeting for Rah-
way and Plainfield. Before the Revolution he was living at Union-
town, New Jersey, but his sympathies being with the Tories, he went
to New York City during the war. However, being a non-resistant
Quaker, he gave no aid to the British. At the close of the war he
took refuge in Nova Scotia, and his Rahway property was confis-
cated. With the exception of a son and a daughter, his family accom-
panied him to Canada, where he was admitted, 15-71110.-1802, to the
Nantucket Monthly Meeting. Six years later he returned to New
Jersey, but after his wife died he migrated to Norwich, Upper Can-
ada, where he bought 2,000 acres of land.

Samuel (3) Moore married, 8-1 1010.-1763, Rachel Stone, born
September 21, 1743, died at Elizabethtown, New Jersey, December
7, 1813. Children: 1. Sarah, born at Uniontown, New Jersey (now
Menlo Park), died in North Norwich, Canada, 14-8100.-1842 ; mar-
ried, in New York City, 31-51110.-1781, Hugh Webster, Jr. 2. Joseph,
lived near Chillicothe, Ohio. 3. Crowell, married Experience Clark-
son. 4. Phoebe, married Moses Shaw. 5. Enoch, married Eliza-
beth. 6. Rachel, married Joseph Young. 7. Elias Brittan. 8. John,
married (first) Anna Gillam; (second) Deborah Stogden. 9. Samuel
(4), Jr., of whom further. 10. Lindley Murray, born 3 1-51110.-1788,
died at Rochester, New York; married Abigail L. Mott, who died
6-91110.-1846, daughter of Adam and Anna Mott. 11. A child, died
in infancy.

(Ambrose M. Shotwell: “Annals of Our Colonial Ancestors and
Their Descendants,” pp. 21-23. Family records.)

V. Samuel (4) Moore, Jr., son of Samuel (3) and Rachel (Stone)
Moore, was born, probably in Nova Scotia, Canada, in 1783 or 1 784
and died at Rahway, New Jersey, probably about i860. He sailed

120

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

a coaster between Nova Scotia and Boston. During the War of 1812
his vessel was captured by the British and he was set ashore. He was
a strict Friend and, when the “meeting divided,” he stayed with the
Hicksite branch, the original Quakers.

Samuel (4) Moore, Jr., married (first), at Falmouth, Massa-
chusetts, about 1808, Charity Gifford, who died about 1812. He
married (second), at or near Rahway, 28-91110.-18 15, Elizabeth
Lundy Shotwell, born in 1795, died in 1827, daughter of William
and Elizabeth (Moore) Shotwell, of Rahway, New Jersey. He mar-
ried (third), at Rahway, New Jersey, about 1829, Margaret Moores,
born 16-8010.1788, died in Perth Amboy, New Jersey, daughter of
of Robert Moores. Child of first marriage : 1. Prince. Children of

second marriage : 2. William Shotwell. 3. Charity. 4. Harvey Shot-
well. 5. Samuel Lindley. 6. James, died in infancy. 7. Philip Dor-
land. Children of third marriage: 8. Elizabeth. 9. Elias Brittan,

of whom further.

(Ambrose M. Shotwell: “Annals of Our Colonial Ancestors and
Their Descendants,” p. 21. Rev. Joseph W. Dally: “Woodbridge,
New Jersey, and Vicinity,” p. 337. Family records.)

VI. Elias Brittan Moore, son of Samuel (4) Moore, Jr., and
Margaret (Moores) Moore, was born in Rahway, New Jersey,
March 26, 1832, and died on the Tulalip Indian Reservation in the
State of Washington, November 5, 1885. He went with his wife to
Seattle from New York in 1870.

Elias Brittan Moore married, January 12, 1864, Judith Cox
Jones, born September 23, 1832, died in Seattle Washington, in May,
1907. She was the daughter of Isaac Jones, who was born in Eng-
land and died in Newark, New Jersey, and his wife, who was also
born in England. Children: 1. Margaret, of whom further. 2.

Mollie S., married George M. Coupe, of Seattle. 3. Judith Johnson.
4. Wallace Henry, died in Alaska. 5. Myrtle. 6. George W.

(Ibid. Family data.)

VII. Margaret Moore, daughter of Elias Brittan and Judith
Cox (Jones) Moore, was born in Chicago, Illinois, June 7, 1869.
She married, May 22, 1890, in Seattle, Norval Hastings Latimer.
(Latimer VIII.)

Mrs. Latimer is still residing in Seattle, where she is very active in

121

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

all charitable and social welfare work, including the Children’s Ortho-
pedic Hospital, Seattle Nursing Service, and Annie Wright Seminary
Club. She is a member and trustee of the Sunset Club, president of
the Seattle Historical Society, trustee of the Seattle Symphony
Orchestra, president of the Woman’s Auxiliary of the Diocese of
Olympia, and a member of Trinity Protestant Episcopal Church.

(Family data.)

(Latimer Royal Descent from Charlemagne)

I. Pepin of Landen, Mayor of the Palace of Austrasia, was made
Duke of the Austrasian Franks, A. D. 680.

II. Begga, daughter of Pepin, Mayor of the Palace of Austrasia,
married Ansegis, son of Arnulf, Bishop of Metz.

III. Pepin d’Heristal, Duke of Austrasian Franks, died in 714.

(“Cambridge Medieval History,” Vol. II, p. 126.)

IV. Charles Martel, born in 690, died in 741 ; routed the Saracens
near Poitiers, A. D. 732.

V. Pepin the Short, born in 714, died in 768; King of France,
752-68.

VI. Charlemagne or Charles the Great, born April 2, 742, died
January 28, 814; Roman Emperor, 800-14.

VII. Louis the Pious, born in 778, died in 840; Emperor, 814-40.

VIII. Charles the Bald, born in 823, died in 877; Emperor,

875-77-

IX. Judith, daughter of Charles the Bald, married Baldwin I,
Count of Flanders.

(H. B. George: “Genealogical Tables Illustrative of Modern

History,” Table No. XII.)

X. Baldwin II, who died in 918, married Aelfthryth, daughter
of Alfred the Great, King of the West Saxons, and of his wife,
Elswitha.

XI. Arnulf the Elder, married Adele, daughter of Heribert II,
Count of Vermandois (a Carlovingian) .

(Ibid., Table No. XXIX.)

122

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

XII. Baldwin III, Count of Artois, died in 962 ; married Mathilda,
daughter of Hermann Billung, Duke of Saxony.

XIII. Arnulf II, born in 961, died in 989, Count of Boulogne and
Flanders, 965-89; married Susanna, daughter of Berenger II, King
of Italy.

XIV. Baldwin IV, Count of Flanders, 989-1036; married (first)
Otviga, daughter of Friedrich, Count of Luxemburg. She died Feb-
ruary 21, 1019, and he married (second), Eleanore, daughter of
Richard II, Duke of Normandy. She died without issue.

XV. Baldwin V, Count of Flanders, son of Baldwin IV, by his
first wife Otviga, married Adela, daughter of Robert II, King of
France.

(C. M. Allstrom: “Dictionary of Royal Lineage,” Vol. I, pp.

271-72.)

XVI. Matilda, daughter of Baldwin V, Count of Flanders;
married (first) Gerbod, Avocat of the Abbey of Saint Bertin, at St.
Omer; she married (second) William the Conqueror.

XVII. Gundred, daughter of Matilda of Flanders by Gerbod,
Avocat of the Abbey of Saint Bertin at St. Omer, married William,
Earl of Warren.

XVIII. William, second Earl of Warren, married Elizabeth,
daughter of Hugh, Count of Vermandois.

(E. A. Freeman: “History of the Norman Conquest of Eng-

land,” Vol. Ill, p. 67.)

XIX. Reginald Warren, son of William, second Earl of War-
ren, and Elizabeth of Vermandois, married Alice, daughter and heir
of William de Wirmgay.

(T. C. Banks: “Dormant and Extinct Baronage of England,”

Vol. I, p. 195; Vol. Ill, p. 688.)

XX. William Warren, son of Reginald and Alice (de Wirmgay)
Warren, married Beatrice, daughter of Hugh de Pierrepont.

XXI. Beatrice Warren, died in 1204, daughter of William and
Beatrice (de Pierrepont) Warren, married (first), Doun Bardolph,
and (second), Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent.

(Ibid., Vol. I, p. 195. Cokayne: “Complete Peerage,” Vol. VII,
pp. 133-41.)

123

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

XXII. John de Burgh, son of Hubert and Beatrice (Warren) de
Burgh, did not inherit the earldom of Kent because it was confirmed to
his father in 1226 with the limitation that the earldom should descend
to his issue by the third wife, Margaret, daughter of William the
Lion, King of Scotland. John de Burgh married Hawise, daughter of
William de Lanvallei, who was one of the twenty-five sureties of
Magna Charta.

(T. C. Banks: “Dormant and Extinct Baronage of England,”
Vol. I, pp. 111-12. Cokayne: “Complete Peerage,” Vol. VII, p.
142.)

XXIII. John de Burgh, son of John and Hawise (de Lanvallei)
de Burgh, died in 1280, leaving three daughters.

(T. C. Banks: “Dormant and Extinct Baronage of England,”

Vol. I, p. 1 12.)

XXIV . Hawise de Burgh, daughter of John de Burgh, married
Robert Grelle or Gresle, who was summoned for military service in
1277 and was knighted at Christmas, 1278.

(Cokayne: “Complete Peerage,” Vol. VI, pp. 107-08.)

XXV. Joan Grelle, daughter of Robert and Hawise (de Burgh)
Grelle, married Sir John la Warr, who is mentioned in the “Victoria
History of Lancashire.” John la Warr was made a Knight of the
Bath in 1306 by the Prince of Wales and was frequently summoned
to Parliament, both in his father’s lifetime and after, between 1307
and 1342. He took part in the Scotch, Flemish, and French wars
and was at the sea fight off Sluys in 1340; was captain of twenty
men-at-arms and twenty archers at the siege of Nantes in 1342, and
was at Crecy in 1346. He died in 1347, and his will with codicil,
directing his burial to be in Swineshead Abbey, was proved at Lincoln
in June, 1347.

(Victoria: “History of Lancashire,” Vol. I, pp. 333-34.)

XXVI. Catharine la Warr, daughter of Sir John and Joan
(Grelle) la Warr, married (first) Robert de Brewer, who died in
1325 ; she married (second) Warin Latimer, who was born about 1300
and died August 13, 1349, son of Thomas, Lord Latimer, by Lora,
daughter of Henry Hastings; grandson of John Latimer by Chris-
tian, daughter of Walter Ledet; and great-grandson of William Lati-
mer, of Scampston. He fought at Boroughbridge in 1321 and in the

124

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

expedition to France in 1345 and 1346. He and his father are listed
in the English Peerage as Lord Latimer and resided at Braybrook in
Northampton.

(Cokayne: “Complete Peerage,” Vol. VII, pp. 453-54, 463.)

XXVII. Elizabeth Latimer , daughter of Warin and Catharine
(la Warr) Latimer, married Thomas Griffen. The title of Lord
Latimer eventually descended to the Griffens after the death, with-
out issue, of her four brothers.

XXVIII. Richard Griffen, son of Thomas and Elizabeth (Lati-
mer) Griffen, married Anne, daughter of Richard Chamberlain.

(Ibid., p. 456.)

XXIX. Nicholas Griffen, son of Richard and Anne (Chamber-
lain) Griffen, died in 1436; he married Margaret, daughter of Sir
John Pilkington.

XXX. Nicholas Griffen, son of Nicholas and Margaret (Pilking-
ton) Griffen, was born in 1426 and died in 1482. He became Lord
Latimer, as heir to his uncle John Griffen, who in turn received the
title from his grandmother. He was sheriff of Northampton in 1473,
besides holding other offices. Nicholas Griffen married (first) Cath-
erine, daughter of Richard Curzon; (second) a Roos; and (third)
Marina Green.

(Ibid., p. 457-)

XXXI. Catherine Griffen, daughter of Nicholas and Catherine
(Curzon) Griffen, married Sir John Digby, who was the son of Ever-
ard and Agnes (Clark) Digby, and grandson of Robert and Jane
(Bellers) Digby.

(“Visitation of County of Leicester,” in “Harleian Society Pub-
lications,” Vol. II, p. 40.)

XXXII. William Digby, son of Sir John and Catherine (Griffen)
Digby, is mentioned in the “Visitation of Leicester.” The Digby line
was investigated by Colonel Joseph L. Chester. He states that
Nichols’ “History of Leicestershire,” Vol. IV, p. 19, mentions Sir
John Digby and his son William, and that William is described as
marrying Helen, daughter of John Roper, and dying without issue.

Colonel Chester does not agree with the county history and gives
as his reason a quotation from the will of Sir John Digby. A bequest
was made to “Elyne Mountegue, late wife to my son, William Digby

125

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

of Luffenham, now deceased, and daughter of John Roper.” He pro-
vided it should later go to John Digby, “son of my said late son,
William Digby.” After that it was to go to other heirs male of Wil-
liam. Helen Roper married (second) Sir Edward Montague and
died in 1563. She mentioned in her will her son, William Digby, and
smaller boys.

Colonel Chester, having proved that William Digby had at least
two children, then proceeds to show that a Digby pedigree was in the
possession of the late Earl Digby, of Sherborne Castle, Dorsetshire,
and follows the early record of the family as found in the “Visita-
tions.” This pedigree states that William Digby was married twice;
(first) to Rose Perwich (or Prestwich), and (second) to Helen
Roper.

The marriage of a William Digby with Rose Perwich (or Prest-
wich) of Lubenham in County Leicester is mentioned in the “Visita-
tion” of that county in 1619, which also names their two sons. The
Digby pedigree at Sherborne Castle, after giving the early history
of the family as above, gives the children of William Digby. Among
them is Simon , of whom further.

(“Visitation of Leicestershire,” in “Harleian Society Publica-
tions,” Vol. II, p. 63. E. E. and E. M. Salisbury: “Family Histories
and Genealogies,” Vol. I, Part 2, pp. 442-46.)

XXXIII. Simon Digby, son of William and Rose (Perwich or
Prestwich) Digby, is mentioned in the “Visitation of Leicester” in
1619, and in the pedigree of the family of Earl Digby at Sherborne
Castle. According to the pedigree, Simon was beadle in the county
of Rutland, and married Anne, daughter of Reginald Grey, of York.

XXXIV. Everard Digby, son of Simon and Anne (Grey) Digby,
married, according to the pedigree at Sherborne Castle mentioned
above, Katherine, daughter of Mr. Stockbridge de Vandershaff Theu-
ber de Newkirk.

(E. E. and E. M. Salisbury: “Family Histories and Genealo-

gies,” Vol. I, Part 2, p. 445.)

XXXV . Elizabeth Digby, daughter of Everard and Katherine
(Vandershaff) Digby, is given in the above-mentioned pedigree as
marrying a Mr. Lynde.

The above record, found in an English source, provides an inter-
esting confirmation of traditions and family records in this country.

126

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Among the written records is an old Bible record. It is a copy of
the “Breeches Bible,” printed in 1595, and in 1892 owned by Mrs.
Cornelia (Walter) Richard, of Boston, a descendant of Chief Justice
Lynde. This Bible has on the outside of the covers “Enoch Lynde”
in large gilt letters. Pasted on the first fly leaf is a memorandum
evidently by Nathaniel Lynde:

An Extract of something to be remembered from the leafe before
the Title page of a Bible of my Grandmother, Mrs. Elizabeth Lynde,
sent over to my father Simon Lynde and recd by him 13th May 1675 ;
at the same time written in the 2d Leaf with his own hand as follow-
eth, viz: “This Bible formerly my Father Mr. Enoch Lynde’s who

died the 23rd Aprill 1636, afterwards my dear Mother Eliz. Lynde
had. She departed this life 1669 and 13th May 1675 This Bible
was brought me here to Boston in New England and sent me by Eliz.a
Parker who writes me my mother gave it to her when she tended on
her but presents it to me, that it might not goe from my Family. But
that I and mine might improve it and Its Holy Truths which I beg of
God we may. That keeping his Word we may thereby be kept, and
found among the number of the Righteous ones. So prayeth Simon
Lynde, Boston, New England 13th May 1675.”

On the first page of the second fly leaf this record is found:

{Mr. Enoch Lynde dyed 23 April Ano
Dom. 1636. Mrs. Elizabeth Lynde,
his wife whose maiden name was Digby
dyed Ano Dom. 1669.

f Mr. John Newdigate dyed 4 Sept. 1665
My grandparents byl d 8j- Mrs. Anne Newdigate died

my mother [ 1679 aged 84 years.

' My hond Father Simon Lynde Esq. was
born June 1624 was contracted to my
hond mother, then Hannah Newdigate,
in Feb. 1651 and was married to her
upon his return from England Feb.
1652 and dyed 22 Nov.br 1687 aged 63
years. My hond mother Mrs. Hannah
Lynde wras born 28 June 1635 and dyed
20th Decber 1684 in the old house and
the same room, where she herselfe and
most of her 12 children were born in
Boston.

N. B. Living children
9 sons and 3 daughters
were born unto them in
23 years from Decem-
ber 1653-1676

127

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

In addition to the record in the Bible presented above, there are
several copies of an ancient pedigree in various branches of the Ameri-
can family. This pedigree gives the following concerning Elizabeth
Digby :

Elizabeth Digby whose Parents dying while she was young, she
was sent into Holland for Education and there Instructed in the Pro-
test. Religion her relations being generally Roman Catholics. She
was a near relation to Jn° Digby ist Earl of Bristol who introduced
her son Simon Lynde to Kiss K. Charles hand: She dyed a widow
1669.

Enoch Lynde is described on another page of the Bible as a grand-
son of Nathan Lynde and of Mrs. Elizabeth Lynde, but his parents
are not known. He may have been born in the Netherlands or was at
least of Dutch descent. Enoch Lynde was a shipping merchant
engaged in foreign trade and had a contract to carry mails to the
Low Countries. He acted as an agent for the government during
the war with France in 1627. His widow is mentioned in an old
business paper as residing in Buttolph Lane in London in 1651. He
married, October 25, 1614, at the Church of St. John in the Parish of
Hackney near London, as above mentioned, Elizabeth Digby.

(E. E. and E. M. Salisbury: “Family Histories and Genealo-

gies,” Vol. I, Part 2, pp. 359-60, 363, 364-69, 445.)

XXXVI. Simon Lynde , son of Enoch and Elizabeth (Digby)
Lynde, was born, according to the old Bible record, in June, 1624,
and died November 22, 1687. He married, in February, 1652, Han-
nah Newdigate, daughter of John Newdigate, of Boston.

(Ibid., pp. 371-74-)

XXXVII. Nathaniel Lynde, son of Simon and Hannah (Newdi-
gate) Lynde, was born November 22, 1659, and died October 5, 1729.
He married (first), in 1683, Susannah Willoughby, who died Febru-
ary 22, 1709; he married (second) Mrs. Sarah (Lee) Buckingham,
widow of David Buckingham and daughter of Thomas Lee.

(Ibid., pp. 396-98, 402, 407, 409, 410.)

XXXVIII. Hannah Lynde, daughter of Nathaniel and Susannah
(Willoughby) Lynde, was born September 10, 1698, and died prior
to 1736. She married, June 22, 1725, the Rev. George Griswold.
(Griswold III.)

(Ibid., Vol. II, Part 1, p. 34.)

128

LATIMER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

XXXIX. Lucretia Griswold, daughter of the Rev. George and
Hannah (Lynde) Griswold, was born March 26, 1731. She mar-
ried, January 28, 1747-48, Colonel Jonathan (2) Latimer. (Lati-
mer IV.)

(C. D. Parkhurst: “Latimer Family,” in “New York Genealogi-
cal and Biographical Record,” Vol. LII, p. 17. H. A. Baker: “His-
tory of Montville, Connecticut,” p. 316.)

XL. Joseph Latimer, son of Colonel Jonathan (2) and Lucretia
(Griswold) Latimer, married Anna Dobbins.

(H. A. Baker: “History of Montville, Connecticut,” p. 322.)

XLI. Alexander Latimer, son of Joseph and Anna (Dobbins)
Latimer, married (first) Eunice Jane Guthrie.

XLII. William Guthrie Latimer, son of Alexander and Eunice
Jane (Guthrie) Latimer, married (first) Martha Jane Pearce.
(Pearce IV.)

XLIII. Norval Hastings Latimer, son of William Guthrie and
Martha Jane (Pearce) Latimer, married Margaret Moore.
(Moore VII.)

129

BOOK REVIEWS

ANDLEDAY ART, by Marion Nicholl Rawson. Illus-
trated. E. P. Dutton & Co., Inc., New York City, $5.

We have found ourselves “held in the thrall” of this
book from the first page of it to the last; we have read it
through — which cannot be stated for many books, probably of most
books. And it occurs to us, as a result of this pleasurable and profita-
ble experience, that if the earlier folk of whom and about whose
handicraft it is written might know of the intimate and practical way
in which the common round of their times and the high lights of their
candlelights have been interpreted, or rather brought along down to
us and our times, they would have a new reason for giving thanks
after their happy old fashion. For Marion Nicholl Rawson is a most
sympathetic explorer in the lands and usages of old times, as the
number of her volumes on related subjects that have preceded this one
are proof sufficient. We have been putting the days of old too lightly
by; the painstaking clarity of this work of pleasure and of use may
no longer allow us to do so. Herewith, every page of the results of
the author’s exploration and research, intelligently illustrated, too,
cannot fail to make an enduring impression upon many who have
put the simple life too far away altogether.

Numbers of books have appeared that have given us no more than
a distant horizon; now may we enter with this author into the busy
glow of the elder industries of a candlelighting age, and actually see
forgotten people at work at forgotten handicrafts in their homes and
workshops. Arts, the simple arts, and numerous manifestations of
Colonial and later art-performance, in ascending scales of primitive
products to near-perfection of concentrated effort — these are most
interestingly and entertainingly investigated and described — the con-
tent of a book which is, as we have stated, quite unequalled as a prac-
tical expression of real friendship with yesterday’s people and their
work of use, skill and ornament.

Carving, sculpture, pottery, the arts graphic, painting, silhouettes,
furniture of artists, the smith as an artist, glass art, architecture, and
many another theme — these have not merely been touched upon, but

130

BOOK REVIEWS

gotten in touch with. Students of “old times,” readers of all books
that actually are worth writing, are the gainers from this publication.
Taunton, Massachusetts. F. W. H.

“The Episcopal Church in the United States, 1800-1840; A Study
in Church Life,” by William Wilson Manross. Two hundred and
seventy pages. Columbia University Press, $3.25.

Here is a study of American church history in an attractive style,
factual without being boring. Its scope is confined to the Episcopal
Church in the United States during the first four decades of the last
century.

In the sphere of institutional religion the period witnessed keen
inter-denominational rivalry for national leadership, from the results
of which we have not yet recovered. The now familiar adjuncts of
church life — principally, missionary movements, theological semi-
naries, Sunday schools, sewing groups, revivals, Bible and tract socie-
ties, took root and developed during these years. Hence the book.

The author surveys the emergence of the Episcopal Church from
its Church of England colonial sources, and indicates the difficul-
ties to be overcome, on account of the ties between the mother
church and the English government, during and after the strug-
gle for independence. From a vast array of authentic source mate-
rial he has succeeded in abstracting a very readable digest.

The principal divisions of this monograph are functional, dealing
with the Rector, the Missionary, the Parish, the Services, the Lay-
man, and the Layman at Work. Each is dealt with in rich detail
which characterizes transition from uncertainty to assurance as to
objectives and means. In material things the author notes the change
from pitch pipe to organ, from footwarmers to anthracite stoves,
from oil lamps to gas light, from ugly church centered “three decker”
pulpits to ones of modest size set to the side of the building, and in
architecture from colonial to Gothic style, etc. The book is fortified
with seventeen pages of bibliography and complete index.

Glen Rock, New Jersey. J. E. B.

“Business Enterprise in the American Revolutionary Era,” by
Robert A. East; 387 pages. Columbia University Press, New York
City; P. S. King and Son, Ltd., London.

BOOK REVIEWS

The thesis of this monograph is of value to those who are inter-
ested in understanding the evolution of our present business machine.
According to the author’s hypothesis the basis for large scale busi-
ness organization was laid during the colonial era. But there was
a lag due to reliance on British commercial credit, imperial restric-
tions, and a general economic provincialism. It took the Revolution
to sweep away such restrictions and to force the Americans out into
the stream of daring speculative enterprise which was to promise in
our day “a chicken in every pot and two cars in every garage.”

The effect of the Revolutionary forces — expansion of markets,
stimulus of new investment ideas, and the rise of new business groups
moving toward large scale business associations — on the various
geographical areas is shown. The author supports his thesis by giv-
ing something of a biographical sketch of the “new business” leaders
and their activities. Robert Morris, Silas Deane, Jeremiah Wads-
worth, and members of the Livingston and Schuyler families, as well
as many of their lesser associates, are paraded across the stage of
the Revolutionary drama. Although the patriotism of some is not
questioned, their roles were not beneficent ones. The speculators’
activities under two flags — which confirms the suspicion lurking in the
minds of many that the “god of profits” knows no national boundaries
— are revealed.

Although the conservatives received a political “worsting for sev-
eral years,” as a result of the democratic virus which was loosed
under the impetus of the Revolution, they gradually regained con-
trol, inaugurated a regime of impersonal and institutionalized capi-
talism, and paved the way for the economic and political develop-
ment which elevated the Hamiltonian philosophy to the dignity of a
national gospel.

One may wonder if the author has over-emphasized the influence
of the Revolution in the development of American business, but his
copious references to sources as well as to secondary materials and
his extensive bibliography indicate that he has made a careful study
of the subject.

University of Arkansas. A. L. V.

I32

THE

FIRST

tmmuH

BABY

born oh American Wi is saiDTo iaye
Been SNORRO, SON oFIWoQFINkI
KARIESFNI AMD GODftlP, BORN IN 1007 \
guorio w&s -me widow of ubf

ERICSSON’S BROTNeft.TJORSTeiN.

QHUwn ffeurr/oA/s coMM/rrae. - /mt/ohm. coiwc/t.

THEME CENTER OF THE NEW YORK WORLD’S FAIR
Whose Thoroughfares Are Paved with More than 1,000,000 Square Yards of Asphalt

AMERICANA

APRIL, 1939

ueen of tke Confech

e Queen 01 tne \^onieaeracy

By Craddock Goins, Jackson, Mississippi

N October 16, 1906, a certain gracious, dark-eyed old lady
gracefully parted from the stirring scene of American
affairs. The end came in New York City. Three days
later her body went through the streets behind a military
band and a troop of United States regulars. The casket was draped
in the starred St. Andrew’s cross of the Confederate flag. It was fol-
lowed by a band of sorrowful men who had marched through that
flag’s unhappy destinies, members of the New York Camp, United
Confederate Veterans.

There was an escort of mounted policemen by order of the mayor.
The band played “Dixie” and other airs of Southern sentiment. The
funeral train was laden with flowers, including wreaths from Gov-
ernor and Mrs. Theodore Roosevelt.

Such was America’s parting salute to Varina Howell Davis, whose
spirit flashed a rose-red glow against the thunderclouds of secession
that shocked the Nation, stirred the world and immortalized certain
sentimental values for posterity’s most popular legends.

Thus passed the first lady of the Confederate States of America,
who won in sorrowful exile the most spectacular honors ever paid the
obsequies of any woman by this government. No first lady of the
United States was ever honored in life or death as dramatically as
the widow of the man who so furiously flared the torch of rebellion
in the face of that government.

A Nation fairly stood on tiptoe for this final glimpse of a
remarkable American. Yet no one will mark this anniversary. For
Mrs. Jefferson Davis strode across the national horizon under hys-

THE QUEEN OF THE CONFEDERACY

terical conditions that made it impossible to fix a complete image of
her character. Everything was topsy-turvy. A Nation that had just
emerged from the public insanity that caused it to hang a woman and
persecute innocent people out of profound grief for the assassination
of Lincoln, now was applauding the “Rebel Queen,” as Mrs. Davis
sometimes was called, and was hissing the martyred Lincoln’s unhappy
widow wherever she appeared.

The pendulum of public popularity was doing crazy things. Mary
Todd Lincoln was suffering humiliation unbearable at a time when
she needed kindness most. Varina Howell Davis was enjoying amaz-
ing popularity at the hands of the very people from whom she had
least to expect. Perhaps it was because the people just did not know
what to do with her.

Anyhow, in hazy mists of tears and turmoil the Nation laid her
somberly aside with nothing for its memory but pictures caught out of
focus in a fragmentary moment of her impassioned public scene, a
scene that had known her eager face in curious blends of pride and
prayer, humility and hauteur, passion and tenderness — a scene that
had known her variously as a patrician beauty in Mississippi, a gracious
hostess in Washington, Richmond and Montgomery; a wretched fugi-
tive in the swamps of Virginia and the Carolinas; a prisoner in Georgia,
and a queenly refugee in Havana, Montreal, London, Paris, Berlin
and other foreign centers.

However, a fairly human picture of the Southern soldier’s “Queen
Varina” can be brought to view by washing away many of the emo-
tional absurdities that have overshadowed it.

We pick up that picture as it lay blurred in a Nation’s tears on
the day of her burial. Then a public that had drawn her image in
broken lines of cruelty and harshness viewed her in equally grotesque
shapes of melodramatic sadness.

None of this was as she would have wished. Yet much of it was
her own fault. She was not to blame for having to spend the last
years of a sorrowful life among the very people who had stripped her
land of the rich jewels of the most idealistic social order this continent
ever knew. The North didn’t understand it. Friends in the South
bitterly resented it. To no one could Varina explain. A woman of
qualities so truly remarkable in many ways was pathetically helpless
at self-justification.

142

THE QUEEN OF THE CONFEDERACY

Actually she had little choice in the matter. When the dream-
house of her Confederacy crashed, her own fate was sealed as inex-
orably as a soldier sentenced to die at dawn. Her doom was banish-
ment from the land she loved. It was either rust away in Mississippi,
pine away in alien courts, or employ her rich talents among fellow-
Americans of the North — Yankees, to be sure, but Americans none
the less.

To the North her qualities of Americanism were peculiar. She
was known as an imperious character. She was the impersonation of
traditions of a shattered empire — the living, liquid note of an ill-
starred society that spread the wings of the most romantic ideals in
the teeth of a deadly, rising sea of materialism. She was the per-
sonal expression of a dreamland created against the melancholy
'magnificence of swamp, song and slavery. She was a paradoxical
embodiment of all the passionate sentiment of a land of paradoxical
splendors — “Plantation aristocracy,” “Southern hospitality,” and
“Old Black Joe.”

Her social order was the nearest approach to imperialistic gran-
deur this Nation ever knew. She loved it with the fierce ardor of a
high-spirited stock deeply rooted in the feudal traditions of Europe.
The North heard her in the full cry of that ardor. It saw her in the
high bloom of the passion flower widely dramatized as “the spirit of
southern womanhood,” commonly accepted as a thing unconquered
and unconquerable.

The North felt the spell of her awesome personality at its high-
est tide, when she was bleeding from every pore the emotions of a
sorely wounded heart, a heart mourning a Nation’s misunderstanding.
Not for herself did she mourn; it was for the tragic man she loved
and the cause he led. She knew that man as no other person ever
knew him. As utterly unlike in social and political philosophies as
two people could be, she gave him and his principles a fierce devotion
that almost merged their beings.

No matter how great was their difference in opinion, battle found
them side by side as one. At his death she must have felt that some-
thing of her entity had been destroyed, as she records in personal
memoirs that her very flesh hurt. Even then she could not bear to be
loosed from him entirely. She made his first name part of hers, and
thence forward styled herself V. Jefferson Davis.

143

THE QUEEN OF THE CONFEDERACY

From that moment she dedicated herself to his memory. It is
perhaps because of frenzied devotion to that purpose that she was
so lacking in simplest elements of self-vindication. Thus it was she
permitted her own character to be dimmed, her own motives to be
misunderstood, her own people to doubt her. No soldier of the
South made a greater sacrifice. No veteran of the battlefield car-
ried more wounds of war. She considered herself a ransom for a
dead man’s honor, a human hostage for a Nation trampled by out-
raged conquerors.

Thus it was the North saw her in the honor and glory of an
inspired cause. It saw more. It saw a master showman. No figure
of that period knew more of the black magic of swaying public opin-
ion. With other natural talents she was aided by a beauty that would
not fade, personal charms that grew with age, a heritage of gracious-
ness no defeat could remove.

A daughter of a Yankee was this spitfire queen of the Southland,
known as the speaking voice of a race of haughty hotheads. It was
through her Virginia-born mother that she inherited beauty and a
strong will. But her Connecticut-born father, William B. Howell,
transplanted Natchez planter, contributed other useful qualities,
including a cold, resolute fixedness of purpose.

It was through both of them that she met a strange, moody man
named Davis, who was to influence her life more than anyone else. To
that man, a family friend, then in a mournful hermitage on a brier-
patch farm a few miles up the Mississippi River, near Vicksburg, she
took ready dislike. He was handsome. He carried an air of dis-
tinction. He had a peculiarly sweet voice and a winning manner. But,
she resentfully confided to her mother, he had a “way of taking for
granted that everybody agrees with him when he expresses an opinion
which offends me.”

This thirty-five-year-old farmer obviously was well born. He was
well educated. Varina could not understand how he could be so
plebeian in social philosophy. He even embraced the political heresy
of the “po’ white trash” — a Democrat! Herself a Whig, as were
most of the aristocracy, she was shocked at such treason to birth and
rearing. She hotly told this offensive person exactly what she thought
of him — several times. That settled, she married him and settled
down with Captain Jefferson Davis, U. S. A., retired, in the eighteenth
year of her lovely, arrogant life.

144

THE QUEEN OF THE CONFEDERACY

She had no idea the future had anything more for them than the
simple obscurity of his farm, which they called Brierfield. There they
spent much time planting rose bushes, devising methods to grow more
cotton, visiting sick slaves and helping christen their babies, many of
whom were named for them.

But a few years later found Varina and her farmer-soldier-states-
man in Washington, where she became noted for wit, beauty, social
graces and learning astonishing in one so young. There she helped him
build the greatest military force the Nation had ever known. Tak-
ing over the American Army at a time when it was at low ebb, Secre-
tary of War Davis was determined to bring it to high efficiency. To
this end he appointed a man named Robert E. Lee to take charge of
West Point and train better officers. Varina enthusiastically threw
herself into his zeal for making the United States a mighty war power.
If she had known what was to follow, she might have been greatly
shocked. But it is likely she would have gone right ahead as she did !
Such was the mighty strength of her spirit for doing things in the
grand manner.

With deadly precision they labored, side by side, upon the great
military machine that soon was to destroy them. In the evenings they
read together. They discussed public men. But most of all they dis-
cussed the ambition to make America a strong international power.
There was no happier family in Washington.

They were back at Brierfield, thinking public life was through
with them, when the most eventful day in their lives arrived. They
were planting a Glory of France rosebush in the front of the house.
A messenger dashed up, saluted and gave Jefferson Davis a piece of
paper. She saw his face blanch. He bowed his head as he passed her
the message. It said that at Montgomery a body of men had met
and elected him president of a new nation to be known as the Con-
federate States of America. He went into the house. She sat on
the front porch a long time with a Bible in her hand and read a pas-
sage several times. “Holy, holy, holy, Lord, God of Hosts, heaven
and earth are full of Thy glory.”

In Montgomery the mistress of the Confederate White House
suddenly became a figure of world-wide interest. A distinguished
London war correspondent, W. H. Russell, impressed with unflatter-
ing comments of Northern critics, made it his express purpose to
study her.

145

THE QUEEN OF THE CONFEDERACY

She had thrown together some clothes, gathered her three chil-
dren and fled from her brier-patch happiness. Russell was impressed
with similarities between Varina and his own queen. He found her
“queenly in bearing, poise and beauty.” He traced her history to find
her stock began in King Arthur’s land, Carleon, Monmouth, Eng-
land. “They are calling her Queen Varina now,” he wrote, “and her
friends think this sounds quite as well as Queen Victoria.”

It must be confessed that Varina was not displeased with the title
until she noted the disapproval of her democratic husband. She was
thirty-five years old, still girlish, but her naturally large, pensive eyes,
“wondrously beautiful,” caused Russell to think of her as “a soldier
of many sorrows.” Like his Victoria, he found Varina was married
to a man who loved the common touch. He was astonished to learn
that blacks and the poorest whites were quite as fond of this man
of simple tastes as were the aristocrats.

Varina’s part in the struggle still is open to debate. Mrs. Chest-
nut’s famous diary, certainly not unfriendly, has hinted at her sitting
in counsels between Davis and Lee. Although Varina’s memoirs indi-
cated that she was an onlooker who was “merely overlooked,” there is
abundant evidence that her lively tongue contributed much to the
thought of the hour. There was never a time when Jefferson Davis
did not admire the finely cultivated mind of his beautiful wife, how-
ever much he might have been influenced by her ideas of war.

There is no doubt she was his constant bodyguard, an everready
protector, always alert against criticism. “She seemed herself capable
of commanding a regiment,” comments Mrs. Chestnut, and that
admiring friend adds : “Providence has seen fit that I should know

three great women, and Mrs. Jefferson Davis is one of them.”

Mrs. Chestnut was with Varina when Richmond’s doom was
sealed. The president of the Confederacy gave his wife a purse
and a pistol. She left him reluctantly — “every breath of the way a
prayer for his safety,” according to Mrs. Eron Dunbar Rowland,
whose biography of that lady is the only standard work on her life.

Fleeing with her children, one a babe in arms, Varina heard of
the assassination of Abraham Lincoln when she was at Abbeville,
South Carolina. She burst into tears “at the thought of what the
dreadful tragedy meant to the stricken wife.” She was ill. Her chil-
dren were ill. But every suggestion that the South might surrender

146

THE QUEEN OF THE CONFEDERACY

was met with outbursts of indignation: “Ed die a thousand deaths

before I’d give up!”

She camped in the dark woods at night, sleeping on a hard army
cot. Sometimes the ground was wet. She was worried, but not about
herself and the children, but “about my precious old Ban (her pet
name for the President of the Confederacy), whom I left behind me
with so keen a heartache.”

But one day at daybreak a party led by a thin, haggard man
came upon them. The leader was Jefferson Davis, fleeing for his life.
Some nights later someone came to their tent with news that .a Fed-
eral detachment was approaching. Before they could act a Yankee
guard was at the door. She reached out in the darkness, threw a
raincoat around her husband, not knowing it was her own raincoat.
But she did know her own shawl, and she never apologized for wrap-
ping it around his neck as she bade him slip out and escape. To her
last day Varina defended this act. No criticism of Jefferson Davis
ever stung her more than the report he was disguised as a woman
when captured. Hand over heart, she would stretch melodramatically
in going over the incident, always adding: “What wife would not

have done the same thing !”

She herself was a prisoner in Georgia for several weeks after they
put him in irons at Fortress Monroe. She flew to him as soon as she
could. Although bitter about his persecution, she found the Yankees
quite civil, “both male and female.” It was only through her entreaties
that Andy Johnson finally gave him the liberty of the prison grounds.
That was quite a concession, for the humble Tennessee tailor who
once had made pants for Jefferson Davis was very bitter toward him
— toward him and all his land of caste and social distinction, although
Johnson himself was a native of that land. A complete pardon from
the President was a miracle that nobody but Varina could have
achieved. This victory was won only after her incessant pleas.

Montreal — London — Paris — Berlin — Havana. Finally a quiet
home on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. The sea-sighing tranquillity of
Beauvoir, near Biloxi, was a welcome relief after years of wander-
ing. There she eagerly helped her husband prepare “The Rise and
Fall of the Confederacy.” But Beauvoir no longer was livable after
that gloomy day when she parted with him forever. Their beloved
brier-patch farm had been confiscated. It was in the hands of former

147

THE QUEEN OF THE CONFEDERACY

slaves. Money was not plentiful. Varina’s restless spirit suffered in
the inactivity of her seaside home.

A new occupation grew upon her. Now and then she would flare
up and answer a false report of her husband’s official acts. Soon these
reports came in pairs, in dozens. Eventually she was up to her elbows
in a task requiring all her time — defending the name of Jefferson
Davis. It was to this end that she began preparing her “Memoir.”
That work took her to New York, where publishers long had been
interested in her pen. Too proud for anyone to know she absolutely
was dependent upon this income for a livelihood, Varina let the South-
ern people misunderstand.

Thus it was that Varina found herself condemned in the South in
her old age in exactly the same manner as she was criticized in the
North during the war — as a proud, selfish, mercenary woman. One
charge was well substantiated. She was unutterably proud. She was
proud of the name she bore. On her last visit to Biloxi a dinner was
given in her honor. She was told that because of possible offense to
Northern investors on the gulf coast, it would be better not to men-
tion the name of her husband. “If you must remain silent about Jef-
ferson Davis,” she flared, “you will not toast me!”

When Northern capitalists offered her $90,000 for Beauvoir to
turn it into a hotel resort, she promptly declined, later to sell the
property for $10,000 with the understanding it was to remain a memo-
rial to her husband. Today it is a home for Confederate veterans.

Beautiful social graces made friends quickly for her in the North.
Malicious acquaintances admitted she got along remarkably with the
Yankees, but she “still was doing all the talking.” As she prospered
from literary work, she enjoyed an undertone reminder of Sherman’s
order to “forage liberally upon the land.” But much of her money
she gave away to charities, particularly to the education of poor whites
in the South. She devoted her mornings to writing. She enjoyed
cards and gossip in the afternoon when she was not riding in Central
Park with distinguished people.

Among her noted friends was another stately old woman who had
known much heartache, Mrs. U. S. Grant. At the tomb of General
Grant one day the Union leader’s widow sadly said to Varina: “I

will soon be laid beside my husband in this solemn place. Please visit
it sometimes and think of me.”

148

THE QUEEN OF THE CONFEDERACY

Varina was in a card game a short time thereafter when someone
burst into her apartment at the Majestic Hotel to say: “Mrs. Grant
is dead.” The game ended. When the company was gone, she went
to her bedroom, dropped on her knees and wept.

She made friends with everyone who recognized her husband’s
qualities. Others found no forgiveness in her heart. General James
A. Wilson, a distinguished Union officer, was a frequent visitor in her
drawing room. But General Nelson Miles, who was responsible for
putting her husband in irons at Fortress Monroe, never won her
friendship.

Although she dressed simply, in black trimmed with white, she was
a commanding figure. People on the streets turned to point out the
large, snowy haired old lady who walked with stately, melancholy
grace. One of her severest critics saw Varina in old age as “a proud,
self-contained old woman,” but conceded she was “remarkably alert
mentally and with much conversational charm.”

Yes, she was proud. Her high-headed carriage showed that to the
end. Her vanity was illustrated in mortification at a church mishap.
At St. Timothy’s Church one day she was returning from the altar
after receiving Holy Communion when she tripped and fell, some-
thing that might occur to any old lady of eighty. But this proud
aristocrat was inconsolable. She was all the more displeased with a
report that her fall was caused when she was upset by finding a negro
man at her side at the altar. This she emphatically denied. North-
erners could not understand that she often had worshipped with
negroes before the war, had taught the Bible to negro children, had
visited slave women in childbirth.

In 1906 Varina was prevailed upon by friends to give up quarters
at the Girard Hotel. Many celebrities had made their home there.
But friends thought it was losing caste. Varina had grown indif-
ferent to social stations. Maybe it was because of old age, many sor-
rows or her benevolent activities. Furthermore, she was lonely and
sad. “I want to see my graves,” sighed the tired old lady as she
recalled the land where her loved ones were buried. But she never
saw them again.

While moving to the Majestic Hotel she caught cold. On Octo-
ber 7 pneumonia developed. A daughter, Margaret, rushed to her
from Colorado, found her conscious, quite aware the end was near.

149

THE QUEEN OF THE CONFEDERACY

“My darling child,” she said, “I’m going to die, but I’ll try to be
brave about it. Don’t wear black. It’s bad for your health and will
depress your husband.”

She passed away on October 16, 1906. Funeral services in her
apartment were brief, simple. Relatives and a few friends attended.
The Governor and the mayor joined in extending public honors. On
October 20 the body arrived at Richmond. She was laid beside her
husband at Hollywood Cemetery.

Th omas TJ. 'NAT alter and His orks

By Professor William Sener Rusk, Wells College,
Aurora-on-Cayuga, New York

document which may well serve as Exhibit One in
:ounting the career of Thomas U. Walter is Genealogi-
Sketches (i), which he completed in 1871, and which
___ manuscript form has been deposited in the Historical
Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. The sections having to do
with the architect’s grandparents and parents and with the architect
himself have been abstracted and are given verbatim. As far as facts
go, no discrepancies need be looked for. Interpretations, however, and
supplementary details go far toward giving three-dimensions to the
lay figure described in the text. But first let Mr. Walter tell his own
story.

Frederick Jacob Walter was the first of the paternal ancestry of
the family of whom we have any knowledge. He was born in Ger-
many, and embarked for this country, with his parents, in the year
1749. His father and mother both died on the passage, leaving no
information whatever respecting themselves, their family, or their
ancestry.

It appears that the date of his birth was approximately known, as
we find in the archives of the German Lutheran Church of St. Michael,
in Fifth above Arch Street, Philadelphia, where he was accustomed to
worship, a record stating that he was born in Germany in March,
I743> and that he died on the 15th of October, 1787. The allusion to
his birth, in this connection, seems to have been incidental, as it does
not give the day of the month, and it is found among the records of
deaths — not of births. Its correctness, as far as it goes, cannot, how-
ever, be doubted.

All we know respecting his parents, and his early years, has been
derived entirely from his own recollections transmitted to us by
tradition.

He remembered that he embarked in Germany in a vessel bound
for the United States, with his father and mother, when he was about
six years old; but he was never able to recall the events of his earlier

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

childhood. He had, however, a distinct recollection that his parents
took with them, when they left Germany, their household effects, and
other valuables, intending to make the United States their permanent
home, and that they both died at sea of the plague, and were thrown
overboard. He remembered that on the arrival of the vessel in
Philadelphia, he was put ashore, an infant stranger, without father,
or mother, or relative, or friend, to look after him; without means,
and without any knowledge of the English language. He brought
with him no record to tell anything of his antecedents, or what part
of Germany he shipped from. The fact that the German language
was his native tongue, corroborates his nationality. He continued to
speak that language throughout his life, using it almost exclusively in
his religious and domestic relations, notwithstanding he became a
good English scholar, long before he reached manhood.

He distinctly remembered that, on landing from the vessel, he was
told that everything belonging to his parents had been thrown over-
board, to prevent the infection of the plague from spreading in the
ship, and that he must be sold to pay his passage. This looks very
much as though the master of the vessel had fraudulently, and heart-
lessly, appropriated to his own use, that which rightfully belonged to
that helpless and desolate orphan boy. He was too young to know
his rights, or to realize his situation; it is therefore probable that
he became the passive victim of unscrupulous cruelty; he was put
up at auction, and sold as a “German redemptioner.” Who his pur-
chaser was, is unknown. He is said to have often referred to the old
“Carpenter mansion,” on Chestnut, between Sixth and Seventh streets
(afterwards the site of the “Philadelphia Arcade”), as the house in
which he passed the years of his boyhood, in the capacity of a house-
servant. As soon as he had accomplished the stipulated period of
servitude, whatever that may have been, he was indented as an appren-
tice to a bricklayer. After he had fulfilled his apprenticeship, he com-
menced the business of a master bricklayer, in partnership with Fred-
erick Graff, the grandfather of the present chief engineer of the Phila-
delphia Water Works. He lived many years on Fifth below Arch
Street, where his son, Joseph S. Walter, the father of the writer, was
born. He afterwards purchased ground on the north side of Arch,
below Sixth Street, where he built a house, and resided the remainder
of his life. At his death he left his widow in comfortable
circumstances.

He was twice married. His first wife was Jane McCluskey, a
native of Ireland, who is said to have been a lady of great beauty and
of stately proportions. They had three sons, Jacob F., Isaac, and
Abraham, and a daughter named Margaret, who is reputed to have
inherited her mother’s personal appearance. His second wife was

152

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

Martha Saunders, of Attleborough, Bucks County, Pennsylvania.
Their children were: Joseph S. and George; the latter died in

childhood.

He took part in the Revolutionary War and was one of a detach-
ment of 1,500 volunteers from Philadelphia who were detailed by
Washington to guard the ferries and fording places of the Delaware,
between the Falls of Trenton and Bristol. He was connected with the
expedition that crossed that river, led by the commander-in-chief, on
the fearful night of the 26th of December, 1776, and was conspicuous
in the onslaught that took place, on the following morning at Tren-
ton, which resulted in the defeat of the British forces, and the capture
of 1,000 prisoners, with a vast amount of ammuniton, arms, and mili-
tary stores. The victory thus obtained was second, in the importance
of its results, to none that was achieved during the war. The cool-
ness and bravery of our ancestor, on that occasion, won for him a
reputation as a citizen soldier that went with him through life.

In the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania we find an Act
passed on the 13th of June, 1777, requiring all the white male inhabi-
tants of the State, of 18 years old, and upwards, excepting those
residing in the three western counties, to take an oath of allegiance
and fidelity, before one of the Justices of the Peace, whose duty it was,
to furnish a certificate of the same, to each person so qualifying. The
original certificate of Frederick J. Walter’s submission to that law
is still preserved, and is in the possession of Samuel L. Walter. The
following is a copy of it : —

“No. 785 I do hereby certify, that Frederick J. Walter, of the
City of Philadelphia, bricklayer, hath voluntarily taken and sub-
scribed the oath of allegiance and fidelity, as directed by an act of the
General Assembly of Pennsylvania, passed on the 13th day of June
A. D. 1777. Witness my hand and seal, this 30th day of June 1777.”
(Signed) James Young. (Seal)

This document is not referred to as having any historical value,
either in the relation it bears to the times in which it was executed, or
to the individual to whom it refers. It is introduced in this connection
simply because it identifies, in an official form, the existence of an
ancestor. The fact that the most we know of him is derived from
tradition, gives interest to whatever we find of a documentary char-
acter, in which his name occurs, even though the record may, in many
respects, be unimportant.

We find some references to him in the archives of St. Michael’s
German Lutheran Church of Philadelphia, of which the following is
a translation.

153

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

Under the head of “baptisms”:

“Parents; Frederick Jacob Walter, and his wife

Child, Frederick Jacob, born August 29, 1773
baptized September 29, 1773.”

(Witnesses: The Parents)

“Parents : Frederick J. Walter, and his wife Patty.

Child, Joseph S. born May 15, 1782
baptized July 4, 1782”

Under the head of “deaths” :

“Died; October 15, 1787, Frederick J. Walter,
born in Germany, March 1743.”

It will be observed that this record includes but one of his chil-
dren by his first wife. The remaining three were probably christened
elsewhere. It is supposed that the mother attended some church
where the services were in English, as that language was her native
tongue, and that she took her remaining offspring to that altar,
wherever it may have been. Her descendants say that she was a
Methodist.

In the record of the christening of his son Joseph S. it will be
observed that the mother does not appear as a witness. This may be
accounted for by the fact that she was a Baptist, which would be very
likely to prevent her from being present on the occasion. It is sup-
posed that the rite was performed without her knowledge.

From what has been stated in the foregoing biographical sketch,
it is evident that the lineage of Frederick J. Walter cannot now be
traced back of himself. We shall probably never know who preceded
him in the line of ancestry. His patronymic is a common name in Ger-
many, and has become so throughout the United States. Many who
bear that name in this country, outside of his own descendants have,
no doubt, come from the same stock, and are of the same blood with
us ; but we can never know it.

He departed this life, as indicated by the foregoing record, on
the 15th day of October, 1787, aged 44 years, and 7 months. His
remains were interred in the burial ground attached to the aforesaid
Saint Michael’s German Lutheran Church, in Fifth north of Arch
Street, in the city of Philadelphia. There is a tradition in the family,
to the effect, that he lies between the west front of the church, and the
yard wall on Fifth Street.

Joseph Saunders Walter

son of Frederick Jacob Walter, and his wife Martha, was born in
Fifth below Arch Street, Philadelphia, May 15, 1782. At an early

154

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

age he was indentured, as an apprentice, to Henry Reihle of Philadel-
phia, an extensive Tobacconist, with whom he served the full term of
his apprenticeship. Not having a fancy for that occupation, he left it
shortly after reaching his majority, and turned his attention to the
arts of construction, for which he seemed to have been fitted by
nature. He learned the art of Bricklaying, as well as that of Stone-
masonry with his brother Isaac, and it was not long before he became
extensively engaged in building; — an occupation he pursued success-
fully, for more than 40 years.

He was associated with Daniel Groves in building the Bank of
the United States in Philadelphia (now the Custom House) under a
special partnership limited to that particular structure. He also built
the Philadelphia Exchange, and many other important public works.

He served several years in the Common Council of Philadelphia,
and in the Board of Guardians of the Poor, and held many offices of
Trust and Honor. He was an attractive speaker, and a ready debater,
— a man of large views, and a general intelligence. He was a good
German scholar, speaking the language with fluency and grammatical
propriety. As a citizen, he was popular and highly esteemed; and as
a Christian he was ardent and devoted. The annexed photograph is
from a daguerreotype likeness taken in the year 1846.

He was baptized in the River Schuylkill, by the Rev. Thomas
Ustick, April 6, 1802, and united with the Baptist Church in Second
below Arch Street, in which he held the office of Deacon many years.
He was an excellent singer, and was early called to lead the singing in
the Church, and in the social meetings. He possessed the gift of
prayer in an eminent degree, and in matters of faith was “steadfast,
immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord.” He was
genial in his manners, entertaining in his conversation, and respected
by all who knew him.

He was united in marriage with Deborah Wood, who will be the
subject of the following memoir. They lived happily together more
than 30 years, and after surviving her 14 years, he went peacefully to
rest, November 1, 1855, aged 73 years, 5 months, and 16 days. His
remains were interred in Laurel Hill Cemetery.

Deborah Wood

the wife of Joseph S. Walter, was the daughter of Jeremiah and
Achsah Wood (formerly Quicksall), she was born October 3, 1781,
and was baptized in the River Schuylkill, by the Rev. Thomas Ustick,
on the 6th day of July, 1801, uniting with the Baptist Church on Sec-
ond below Arch Street, Philadelphia. She was a devoted and consist-
ent Christian, fulfilling her duties to her Church, her family, and the

155

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

world with ardor and fidelity. She possessed an intelligent faith,
which was never known to waver, throughout her entire Christian
life. Her knowledge of the Scriptures astonished all who knew her
— she was “a walking concordance.” Her memory was prodigious,
and her power of analysis indicated a well balanced mind.

She was a loving and painstaking wife, an indulgent and devoted
mother, and an intelligent, active, and useful member of the Church
of Christ. She departed this life in the assurance of a blessed immor-
tality, July io, 1841, aged 59 years, 9 months, and 7 days. Her
remains were interred in Laurel Hill Cemetery.

Her marriage with Joseph S. Walter was solemnized May 30,
1803, by the Rev. William Rogers, D. D. Their children were
seven ....

Thomas U. Walter, son of Joseph S. and Deborah Walter, was
born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, September 4, 1804. He was
named after the Rev. Thomas Ustick, the former pastor of his par-
ents. Early in life he exhibited a taste for Architecture, and a pre-
dilection for mathematical studies, which gave promise of future
distinction in the arts of design and construction. In the year 1819,
his scholastic studies were suspended, and he entered the office of Mr.
William Strickland, as a student of Architecture, with whom he
remained until he had acquired the art of linear drawing, and a gen-
eral knowledge of the professional practice of Architecture, after
which he resumed his general studies, and subsequently went through
an elaborate course of mathematics. The next seven years of his life
were devoted to the study of the physical sciences, to the cultivation
of the arts of drawing and painting, and to the attainment of a prac-
tical knowledge of the several branches of mechanical construction
connected with building. During this period he also studied land-
scape painting, in water colors, with Mason, a celebrated teacher of
that art — an art he subsequently made good use of in illustrating his
architectural prospectuses.

In the year 1828 he again became a pupil of Mr. Strickland, under
whose instructions he remained for two years, devoting himself exclu-
sively to the study of Architecture, the practice of which he com-
menced in 1830. The following year he designed the “Philadelphia
County Prison” — his first important work. His plans were adopted,
and the appointment as Architect of the work was conferred upon him
October 14, 1831. The entire structure was erected in conformity
with his drawings, and under his personal superintendence.

His designs for the “Girard College for Orphans” were adopted
by the Select and Common Councils of Philadelphia, in 1833, and the

156

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

corner stone of the main building was laid on the 4th of July of the
same year. The work was executed throughout, from his designs, and
under his supervision, and was brought to a successful completion in
the year 1847. As soon as his duties as Architect were accomplished,
he was elected one of the Board of Directors of the College, in which
capacity he served three years.

He has designed and executed numerous public buildings in his
native city, and throughout the country, besides which, he has had an
extensive private practice.

The annexed photograph is a likeness of him from a daguerreotype
taken by Langenheim, in 1843. It is one of the first good pictures
taken in this country by the process of Daguerre.

In the year 1838, he was sent to Europe by the Building Commit-
tee of the Girard College for the purpose of examining the practical
workings of the various devices and appointments for health, con-
venience, and comfort, in the principal seats of learning in Great Brit-
ain, and on the continent, with a view to derive such information on
those subjects as would be likely to prove useful in fitting up and fur-
nishing the buildings of the College. He was likewise charged to
investigate building improvements in general.

He left New York, July 7, 1838, in the Packet ship “Pennsyl-
vania,” arrived in Liverpool on the 28th of the same month, and
proceeded at once to London, as a starting point in his investigations.
After visiting and examining the leading institutions of learning in
England, he crossed the Strait of Dover to France, where he pur-
sued the objects of his mission. From Paris he went to Italy, stopping
at Dijon and Geneva, and crossing the Alps at Mount Simplon. He
spent some time in Milan, and also made considerable stay at Flor-
ence, after which he went to Rome. From there he crossed over, by
post, to Civita Vecchia, where he embarked on a Mediterranean
steamer for Marseilles, stopping on the way at Genoa and Leghorn.
From Marseilles, he went by post to Paris (no railroad having, up to
that time, been constructed on the soil of France!). After further
researches in Paris he returned to London, by way of Boulogne-sur-
Mer, and from thence to Liverpool. Crossing the Irish Sea, to Dub-
lin, he pursued his journey through Ireland and Scotland, gaining what
information he could on the subjects referred to him. He returned
to Liverpool, by way of New Castle-upon-Tyne, Dunbar, York, Dur-
ham, Manchester and other places of note and interest. He sailed
from Liverpool for New York in the Packet ship “Siddons,” October
21, 1838, where he arrived on the 22d of November, after a boister-
ous passage of 32 days. Shortly after his return, he submitted an
elaborate report, embracing a full account of the improvements and
devices, that were then known, for promoting the cleanliness, comfort

157

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

and convenience of institutions of learning. The College buildings
were subsequently finished, and fitted up, in conformity with the sug-
gestions contained in his report; thus securing to some 500 orphan
boys, their teachers, and their attendants, the advantages of desirable
appointments in their College home.

In the year 1843, he was invited by the Government of Venezuela
to visit La Guayra and examine the port, with a view to the construc-
tion of a Mole, or Breakwater, to shelter the quay from the violence
of the sea, so as to facilitate the discharge of cargoes. He sailed
for this purpose in the month of July, 1843, and arrived at La Guayra
after a voyage of 20 days. He proceeded at once to Caracas and con-
ferred with the authorities, after which he returned to La Guayra,
surveyed the harbor, took soundings of the roadstead, studied the cur-
rents, winds and tides, and the historic phenomena of the Port, after
which he made designs, specifications, and estimates for the construc-
tion of a Breakwater, which were approved by the Government, and
on the 1 2th of October, 1843, he entered into contract for the execu-
tion of the work. On the 24th of the same month he sailed for Phila-
delphia, where he arrived after a stormy passage of 33 days.

After making the necessary preparations, he left Philadelphia, in
the brig “Caracas,” February 12, 1844, with some 50 competent
workmen, and a cargo of materials, machinery, horses, and other
appointments necessary for such an expedition, all of which were
safely landed in La Guayra, after a voyage of 16 days. The work was
commenced immediately after his arrival, prosecuted rapidly to com-
pletion. His eldest son accompanied him, as assistant engineer, but
died of the fever of the country, shortly after his arrival. He had
serious difficulties to encounter at every step of the enterprise; they
were met and successfully overcome. The work was finished and offi-
cially accepted by the government on the 24th of October, 1845. He
sailed for Philadelphia a few days afterward, and arrived November
20, 1845, having been absent from home nearly two years.

In the year 1851, his plans for the “Extension of the United
States Capitol” were adopted, and the appointment of Architect of
the work conferred upon him by the President of the United States.
He held that appointment fourteen years, during which time, in addi-
tion to the works of the Capitol Extension, he planned and executed
the Iron Dome of the Capitol, the East and West Wings of the Pat-
ent Office, and the extension of the General Post Office. He also
designed the new Treasury Building, the Marine Barracks at Brook-
lyn and at Pensacola, and the Government Hospital for the Insane at
Washington, District of Columbia.

Immediately after his appointment in 1851, he removed his family
to Washington, where he continued to reside until 1865, when the

158

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

works under his charge were completed. On the first of June of that
year he tendered his resignation and returned with his family to
Philadelphia.

He made a public profession of religion and was baptized in the
River Schuylkill, at Spruce Street, Philadelphia, by the Rev. John C.
Murphy, on the 12th of July, 1829, and on the same day was received
into the membership of the Spruce Street Baptist Church, then wor-
shipping temporarily in the Court House, at the corner of Chestnut
and Sixth streets, the Meeting House in Spruce Street not having yet
been completed. He was many years Clerk of the Church, and also
Superintendent of the Sunday-School. When called to Washington
in 1851, to take charge of the Extension of the Capitol, he removed
his membership to the E Street Baptist Church of that city, where he
instructed a Bible Class consisting of some 50 or more young men,
which he kept up during the most of the time he resided in that city.
On his return to Philadelphia he became one of the constituent mem-
bers of the “Second Baptist Church of Germantown,” the organiza-
tion of which took place September 20, 1866.

He was twice married. His first wife was Mary Ann E. Han-
cocks, daughter of Robert Elancocks; and his second wife Amanda
Gardiner, daughter of Dr. Richard Gardiner. A biographical sketch
of each will follow this memoir.

He has retired from the active practice of his profession, and is
devoting his time to scientific and literary pursuits, and to the advance-
ment of art in his native city. He resides at present (1871) in Ger-
mantown, one of the rural wards of Philadelphia. In 1849, he
received the honorary degree of Master of Arts (A. M.) , from Madi-
son University, New York. In 1853, that of Doctor of Philosophy
(Ph. D.), from the University of Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, and in
1857, from Harvard University, that of Doctor of Laws (LL. D.)
He held a Professorship of Architecture in the Franklin Institute of
the State of Pennsylvania, and lectured on his art in that Institute for
two successive seasons. In the year i860, he delivered a course of
lectures on Architecture before the students of Columbian College,
District of Columbia. He had also delivered, from time to time,
many popular lectures on the same subject in Philadelphia and its
vicinity.

He has been a member of the “American Philosophical Society”
more than thirty years, and of the “Franklin Institute of the State of
Pennsylvania” since 1829. He was one of the original members of
the “American Institute of Architects,” and is also connected with
many other scientific and literary associations.

Further documentation regarding Walter’s training includes his
student notebooks, owned by his granddaughter, Mrs. Carroll H.

159

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

Wegemann, Baltimore, and titles in the Library of The Franklin Insti-
tute, where he was first a student and then a member.

As Walter in his retirement recalled his early career, it is easy to
see how he felt that all his activities prior to the start of his career as
architect were devoted toward that end, as, no doubt, they were in the
mind of the ambitious young man. Remark has indeed been made at
the mature wisdom involved in pursuing such a program. Mason (3)
in his A. I. A. address makes the scholastic program most appealing,
speaking of how Walter started at fifteen with the designer of Phila-
delphia’s Custom House (also claimed for Latrobe), Mint, and Mer-
chant’s Exchange, with its Choragic Monument of Lysicrates apse,
of how he stayed until he had mastered linear drawing and acquired a
general knowledge of professional practice. He then resumed, we
are told, his general studies, with intensive work in mathematics. For
seven years he studied physical science also, drawing and painting,
mechanical construction, and even landscape painting, returning at
twenty-four for a final period of two years of intensive architectural
work. This survey is but a little different from the architect’s own
recollections — accurate enough, let us repeat, in terms of objectives.
The first indication that there might be another interpretation, no
less creditable, but more credible, comes from Dunlap (4), who says
he was apprenticed in bricklaying and stone masonry to his father,
devoting his leisure hours to architecture, his father being master
mason at the Bank of the United States, later the Custom House,
which Strickland was building at the time. By 1825, Dunlap says, he
was himself a master bricklayer, pursuing meanwhile varied studies to
which his talents in drawing and mathematics led him. In 1830 he
became an intensive pupil of Strickland’s, giving his whole time to
architecture and engineering, and then began practice as an archi-
tect. Corroborative of this less romantic interpretation are diary ref-
erences made by Nicholas Biddle (5). Walter, he says, was the son
of a bricklayer, the former assistant of his father, who later studied
architecture with Strickland. And, lastly, we have the prosaic account
of Jackson, the latest of the investigators (6), who says the year the
lad was fifteen was marked, not by entering Strickland’s office, but by
beginning his apprenticeship to his father, aiding him as contractor in
brick and stone for Strickland’s Bank of the United States; that he
remained with his father until he was twenty-one, when he set up inde-

160

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

pently as a bricklayer, with an office and residence on Race Street, near
Ninth; that he studied architecture at the Franklin Institute under
Strickland, and pursued his general studies for the seven hitherto men-
tioned years in spare time, and (here biographer and autobiographer
agree) that in 1830 he entered Strickland’s office for eighteen months
of intensive study in architecture and engineering. The facts, then,
seem to honor Walter’s energetic mastery of obstacles rather than his
youthful educational theories.

Before turning to Walter’s work as an architect, we must con-
sider briefly his activities outside his profession, and also his person-
ality. From his own account it is clear that as clerk, deacon, Sunday
school superintendent, and Bible class leader he was consistent in his
active support of the several churches to which he belonged. He is
said to have written a number of hymns which attained at least local
fame. Until professional activities took all his time, he was active
also in furthering local efforts toward the development of popular
taste, centered especially in the Franklin Institute, of which he was a
member from 1829, later a member of the board of managers, and
in 1846 chairman of the board (3). He was invited by the managers
to give a course of lectures (voluntary) on architecture in 1836, as
also in the following year. For a time he also contributed to the
Journal of the Institute, being listed for some years on the editorial
staff of collaborators, and styled Professor of Architecture.

Next, reference should be made to his activities in the organiza-
tion of his professional associates. In 1836 there was an attempt to
start an American Institute of Architecture, though there were scarcely
a dozen properly trained architects in the country (3). A preliminary
meeting was held in New York, December 7, 1836, to be followed by
an organization meeting at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts,
Philadelphia, May 2, 1837. The call for this second meeting, signed
by Walter as secretary, now hangs in the A. I. A. offices in the Octa-
gon, Washington. It was found, however, that there were too few
architects to keep the organization active. In 1857 the still flourish-
ing A. I. A. was established. Walter succeeded Richard Upjohn as
the second president in 1876, and held the office until his death. His
addresses at the various conventions are given in the annual proceed-
ings as the years go by. An interesting sample can be found in his
address in 1880. He alludes to the passing of the classic forms in an

161

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

effort to express the spirit of the age, Queen Anne, Stuart, Jacobean,
Rennaissance, and Eastlake, being the current fashions — “having no
trace whatever of paternity, ancient or modern.” He finds the new
designs lack fundamental aesthetic principles, without vigor in mass,
an “aggregation of trivialities in the making up of details.”

In i860 it is recorded that he lectured on architecture at Colum-
bian, now George Washington University in Washington, and also
occasionally in Philadelphia. Finally a youthful effort at spreading
culture is to be seen in the incorporation, by Walter and others, of
the Athenian Institute of Philadelphia, designed to provide public
lectures on moral, literary and scientific questions, April 28, 1838.
In the Ridgeway Library is a letter from the chairman of the com-
mittee to Walter regarding the improvement of a lot on Chestnut
Street by the Franklin Institute in association with the Athenian, the
former owning the lot, the latter proposing to erect the building.

There are two published works, partly original and partly com-
pilation, by Walter. One is entitled Two Hundred Designs for Cot-
tages and Villas, by Walter and J. Jay Smith (7). The designs are
strangely varied for a classicist, being Gothic, Classic, Rustic, and Fan-
tastic. Walter signs one of the Gothic facades, with towers flanking
the front porch, and piers projecting at oblique angles from the cor-
ners. The other book is by the same collaborators, A Guide to Work-
ers in Metals and Stone, in four volumes (8). Here the former
craftsman shows a delight in manufacture which perhaps reached
its climax in the bronze balustrade he designed later for the Senate
staircase in the Capitol.

Extant letters from Walter should come next. Mrs. Wegemann
owns many of them, but they are not yet made public. She also pos-
sesses the MS. report Walter made after his European trip to the
Girard trustees, the copy book of his letters while in Venezuela, and
diaries and account books at different periods. She tells of a large
number of letters, of interest to collectors, sold to a Philadelphia
dealer by the Misses Olivia and Ida Walter. Letters of only casual
interest are owned by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania and the
New York Public Library.

Among the commentators on Walter’s character, John H. B.
Latrobe, in his 1881 address before the A. I. A. (9), spoke of the
president as “brilliant, refined and accomplished.” At the memorial

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

deliberations during the 1888 convention, President Richard M. Hunt
spoke of how Walter’s experience, judgment and manner had aided
the progress of the Institute during his term of office, and the official
eulogist (3) said that his professional learning was “deep and well-
digested,” that his manner of architectural composition was “pure,
artistic and dignified,” and that in social life he was a “cultured gen-
tleman.” Glenn Brown writes (10) :

Mr. Walter, in his architectural designs, followed classical models,
and his work showed well-studied plans, a dignity in mass, and a
refinement in detail which gives his buildings a quality that will be
appreciated by the refined and cultured of the future. He was an
indefatigable student and industrious worker until his death. He lent
a willing hand and gave with zeal his time to any matter which tended
to advance the profession of architecture, and endeared himself to all
who came in contact with him by his genial social qualities.

As I remember him, his personal appearance was most striking —
a large frame, with a strong and impressive face and head crowned
with bushy white hair.

The principles upon which he acted during life are well expressed
in the following extract with which he closed an address to the A. I. A. :

“We owe it to our country, to the age in which we live, to our
families, to ourselves, to devote the rapidly fleeting hours of our
lives to the accomplishment of the greatest possible good in our voca-
tion, ever seeking to discharge our duties in all good conscience toward
those whose interests are entrusted to our care, toward coworkers in
the realm of art, and toward Him in whom we live and move and have
our being.”

A bit less formally, the grandchildren recall how Sunday night
supper was the one meal in the week at which they were permitted to
cat with their grandfather, often the minister of the day being present
as guest, and how Mr. Walter would grow expansive with anecdote
and theological discussion. It was different at other times. If any
unnecessary noise or confusion arose, “Children, you make me bite
my tongue.” He permitted himself but two meals a day, one after
several hours of work starting at five in the morning, the other in the
evening, before another period of work. They recall his conversation
as a major educational influence, the strict regimen of the household,
keyed to quiet and work, and the universal deference paid whenever
in latter years he appeared in public.

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

Walter’s first important commission as architect (1832-35) was
for the Philadelphia County Prison, Philadelphia, usually called
Moyamensing Prison, and styled by Dunlap “castellated architec-
ture” (4). Walter’s own description occurs in the “Franklin Institute
Journal,” II, pp. 189-91 (7). For the women’s section (1837-38)
in a separate building a brown sandstone entrance was provided in a
“simple Egyptian style,” with the entire western fagade in similar
material and style. The Debtors’ Apartment, north of the main
prison (1836), had a facade marked by a recessed portico reminiscent
of the Temple of the Sun on the Island Elephantine, and the windows
were crowned with the massy bead and cavetto of the Egyptian man-
ner, a motive used again at the top of the building. Even the winged
globe appeared in the cavetto of the main cornice and over the door.
Jackson (6) points out that this was the earliest use of Egyptian
motives in America. The Debtors’ Jail was never used for more
terrifying purposes than for housing State witnesses pending their
appearance in court.

Leaving Girard College out of the picture for the present, let us
comment on the other known works of Walter prior, for the most
part, to his departure for Washington in 1851. First come private
houses. As Kimball has observed, Walter, like Strickland and Mills,
generally avoided temple forms in this type (13). The Matthew
Newkirk house, 13th and Arch Street, Philadelphia, later known as
St. George’s Hall (14, PI. XXXII) heads the list. “The front is of
white marble. The beautiful portico is copied from the Erechtheum;
the Ionic columns and richly-ornamented capitals of that celebrated
temple have been universally admired as perfect models in Classic
Architecture. Thomas U. Walter, architect.” So writes Mrs. Tut-
hill in 1847. Kimball thinks the house was the best of the Greek Revi-
val in domestic work. It was torn down early in the present century.

Next, there was the Dundas house, Philadelphia (14, PI. XXXI),
with a hexastyle Ionic portico before a front door provided with rec-
tangular sidelights and fan. In 1834 Nicholas Biddle enlarged his
house on the Delaware, Andalusia, by copying the Theseum, Athens,
the first enthusiast to use a peripteral colonnade for a private house.
In the account books referred to above, we read of various charges

164

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

made by Walter for services to Mr. Biddle in connection with his
“cottage.” There seems little reason to doubt that the architect, at
the time engaged on Girard College, was the professional consultant
of Mr. Biddle, though it may be surmised that the archaeological
knowledge displayed came from the owner rather than from the
architect. Other private houses mentioned include the house for
Joseph Cowperthwaite, also on the Delaware, and the house for the
architect’s own use in Germantown on his return to Philadelphia in
1865.

Banks recorded include the Philadelphia Savings Bank at Seventh
and Walnut streets, and the Chester County Bank, West Chester,
Pennsylvania (3). Churches would include the Fourth Universalist
Church, once at the northeast corner of Juniper and Locust streets,
Philadelphia, and the Spruce Street Baptist Church, Spruce Street
near Fifth, Philadelphia, both built in the forties (6). Jackson sug-
gests, on the basis of its Egyptian style, that the Crown Street Syna-
gogue may have been a Walter design. There are also the First
Presbyterian Church, West Chester, Pennsylvania (15); the First
Baptist Church, Richmond, Virginia; and the Eutaw Place Baptist
Church, Baltimore, the last with white marble facade, built as late
as 1871.

Commissions for courthouses also came to Walter. At West
Chester he designed the Chester County Courthouse (16), finished
in 1847, with a colossal Corinthian portico in front, in prostyle form.
Transverse wings with pilasters and pediments complete a neat com-
position, if it were not for the clumsy Wren tower perched aloft. One
would be tempted to say it must be a later addition were it not for a
similar scheme used at the Berks County Courthouse at Reading,
Pennsylvania (17). In this second case an Ionic prostyle temple on
a high base, with center and end entrances to the cellar, is provided
not merely with a clumsy clock tower, but with a statue on top of it !
That these two compilations cannot be charged merely to youth is
evident when we read of the prize awarded Walter in 1835 for the
Hibernian Hall, Charleston, South Carolina (18) — a distinguished
Ionic hexastyle temple design. Only the door and windows above
break the front cella wall. Windows down the sides are bound by
pilasters reaching from the ground to the entablature, itself severely
plain. The structure was finished in 1841.

165

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

Mention having also been made of the County Prison at West
Chester, and of Horticultural (later Memorial) Hall, at the same
place (15), we are back in Philadelphia for comment on the Preston
Retreat and Wills Hospital, both visible on the Parkway now reach-
ing from the City Hall to the Art Museum. Dunlap is the authority for
the Walter authorship of the Wills Hospital (4), Philadelphia’s
famous eye hospital, now in new and spacious quarters on Spring
Garden Street. The building on Race Street near Eighteenth remained
nearly as built until 1909, when limestone replaced marble for the
fagade, and other changes in design took place (6). At the moment
it is being suggested for varied purposes, with its chances of continued
existence remote. Preston Retreat is at Hamilton and Twentieth
streets. In 1909 an additional story was added; otherwise Walter’s
design still remains (6). The building consists of a front unit, with
projecting center, adorned with a tetrastyle Doric order, entablature
and pediment, reached by a flight of steps, and of an extension to the
rear, also marked with a colonnade. Rectangular window openings
and a polygonal cupola complete the design, a balustrade hiding the
roof. String-courses, rusticated basement walls, and ribbon-treatment
of windows between pilaster-like forms help to refine and functionalize
the design.

We need say no more of the engineering program in Venezuela
than Walter tells in his biography — chiefly because little more is
known. It is reported to be still in use, the pride of the country,
according to Mrs. Wegemann. Also, it is convenient here to mention
Walter’s connection with the City Hall, Philadelphia, John Mac-
Arthur, architect, about which varied statements have been made.
After Walter’s return to Philadelphia, when he was living in virtual
retirement, he advised MacArthur regarding the tower, thereby les-
sening its height and ensuring its stability, and he, when money strin-
gency developed, accepted an invitation to assist with the decorative
work on the building. One is glad to learn from Mrs. Wegemann of
her distinct recollection that Mr. Walter was much annoyed if he were
spoken of as in any way responsible for the architecture of the struc-
ture. He was invited to assist the architect, however, at the laying
of the corner stone (6), and held his position in association with
MacArthur until his death, October 30, 1887. We learn, also, that
Walter had many young men in his office as architectural apprentices

166

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

from time to time (3). One of them, Edward Clark, succeeded him
as architect of the Capitol, when he retired in 1865. Following the
custom of the time, Walter had his office in Philadelphia next to his
residence, in this way being enabled to guide the young men’s leisure
as well as their work, and to insist on the latter.

The first document to be considered in connection with Girard
College is a diary of Nicholas Biddle, the protagonist of the Greek
Revival in America, recounting from the point of view of the presi-
dent of the trustees the story of the erection of the original buildings.
This diary is given in two forms, slightly different, but each appar-
ently authentic, in the “Proceedings of the Numismatic and Anti-
quarian Society of Philadelphia” ( 14) , and in the “Pennsylvania Maga-
zine of History and Biography” (5). The former document is
spoken of as a memorandum penned presumably in 1843, the latter as
from a diary under date January 9, 1839. The diary entry tells how
Stephen Girard left two million dollars to found a college for orphan
boys, with a reserve fund to be used, if necessary, of at least as much
more. Biddle was chosen president of the trustees, and the erection
of the college was the first order of business. The councils had already
offered a premium for the best plan, and had granted it to Walter,
who had subsequently been chosen the architect. “There then was an
Architect appointed and his plan approved, and the danger was that
this plan might be adopted. I say danger. Mr. Walter was the son
of a bricklayer and had begun life by working with his father — at a
later period he studied architecture with Mr. Strickland, and suc-
ceeded to the post of architect against his old Master, by a majority
of (I believe) one vote. His plan was for a large, showy building,
wanting simplicity and purity, but not ill adapted to please others as
it had already pleased the Councils.” Biddle manoeuvred until he
became chairman of the sub-committee of trustees and councils
charged with the erection of the building. “The first difficulty was
to wean Mr. Walter from his plan, — to which the natural self-love
of a young artist, of course, attached him, and I endeavored, while
doing justice to the merits of the plan, to excite his ambition to achieve
something beyond his plan or the plan of anyone else ; in short, to take
advantage of this rare opportunity of immortalizing himself by a per-
fect, chaste specimen of Grecian architecture. He was inclined to
hsten from confidence in me as he had worked at the Bank of the

167

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

United States, where I was chairman of the Building Committee. He
behaved perfectly well about it, no one could have done better. He
renounced his own plan and came at once into my views, and prepared
all the necessary drawings and seconded me with great cordiality.”
Biddle further succeeded by manipulation and persuasion in winning
over the sub-committee, the committee, the trustees, and the coun-
cils, who hesitated at first when called on to erect a Greek temple for
an almshouse. They even caught the spirit of the enterprise, and
when the flank colonnades were tentatively omitted, voted unanimously
for a peripteral plan. Walter’s own description may be found in the
“Journal of the Franklin Institute” for May, 1838; current reports
are dated January 2, 1837, December 30, 1837, and January 21,

I839( ?)•

Our investigation takes us next to the pamphlets boxed as Girard
College Reports in the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. They
begin with the “Laying of the Cornerstone, July 4, 1 833,” on which occa-
sion Nicholas Biddle spoke eloquently. The “Report of the Architect
for 1833” gives a perspective drawing of the entire project. For
1834 the Building Committee conscientiously reports that the details
of the Girard will are being modified only in the thickening of the
walls, since the builders had to choose between the direction that after
a certain height the walls were to be decreased to two feet in thickness,
and the instruction that the building should be erected in the most per-
manent and durable manner. The walls were being chained and
banded as directed, and the surrounding portico had been found neces-
sary to strengthen the third story arches. The “Architect’s Report
for 1837” tells of interesting experiments conducted on the expansi-
bility of the iron bands embedded in the walls to resist the lateral pres-
sure of the arches. Finally, the “Architect’s Report for 1848” tells the
whole story once more.

Four subordinate buildings faced with marble had also been fin-
ished, arranged symmetrically, two to a side. Spaces between the
buildings were inclosed by marble walls and divided into gardens and
playgrounds. A wall surrounded the whole estate with spur piers on
the inside and buttresses on the outside, built of rubble and capped
with marble. At the south entrance two octagonal lodges were pro-
vided (since replaced) faced with white marble, with double gates
between. At the north entrance were two rusticated marble piers

168

( Courtesy of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania)

SECTION AND PLAN OF VESTIBULE, GIRARD COLLEGE, PHILADELPHIA,
PENNSYLVANIA

(Courtesy of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania)
PLAN OF FIRST STORY, GIRARD COLLEGE, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

crowned with marble projecting cornice and blocking, with outer and
inner gates. The total cost is given as $1,933,821.78. The build-
ings were finished in 1847 and opened in 1848.

Criticisms made when the estimates were exceeded during the con-
struction of the building and the income shrank, are answered in the
Biddle memorandum (19). The architect in his 1840 report, also,
compares the progress he is making to the time spent on the Made-
leine, in Paris, and in his 1842 report he defends his original estimate
as more than an opinion, and tells of how he had to prepare the esti-
mate in five days.

Finally, there is the matter of how far the will cramped the style
of the architect (19). Biddle defends the designer. He lists com-
parable structures, the Parthenon, Theseum, and the Temple of Jupi-
ter Olympias at Athens, the Temple of Diana at Ephesus, the Temple
of Jupiter Olympias at Agrigentum, the Madeleine at Paris, the Town
Hall at Birmingham, and the Bank of the United States in Philadel-
phia, as regards proportions. He then argues both that the will neces-
sitated the proportions used at the college, and that they are prefer-
able anyway, in his mind, to that of the ancient buildings he has seen,
where, at least according to rule, the flank had double the number of
columns used in front plus one. He recalls how in comparing the
Bank of the United States to the Parthenon he had mentioned with
approval the omission of the inner row of columns in the portico in
the former case. When at the Patent Office, Washington, a double
colonnade in the portico was used, he was convinced that porticoes in
single colonnades were preferable. And, therefore, he defends the
omission of a second row at the ends of the college, favored merely to
reach the proportions of ancient prototypes.

From the point of view of the users of the building, however
(before Pennsylvania marble yielded to Vermont marble and then to
limestone, and the student body rose from 300 to 1,500), the story is
less academic. Walter C. Gold ’90 (11) reports: “Mr. Walter pre-
dicted that when finished according to the plans of Mr. Girard, the
building never would be satisfactory. That he was in no wise respon-
sible for the poor acoustic conditions is indicated in a footnote of his
report of January 8, 1848, above referred to. He said, ‘The rever-
beration of sound in these rooms, in consequence of their magnitude
and their arch-formed ceilings, renders them wholly unfit for use ; and

169

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

unless a level ceiling is thrown in at the top of the cornice, or some
other means adopted to destroy the reverberation, they can never be
used for the purposes of school or recitation rooms. They are, how-
ever, constructed in exact accordance with the Will, and these results
were anticipated in the earliest stages of the work, but as Mr. Girard
left no discretionary power in reference to this part of the design,
we were compelled to take the letter of the Will as our guide, let the
results be what they might.’ ” We may note, however, that for sixty-
six years the college was used principally for school purposes, accord-
ing to Mr. Gold.

Our last document is Walter’s report in 1884 (21) on the state
of the structure. In all essentials he found it “is solid and as perma-
nent as it was on the day of its completion.”

The trip to Europe in connection with the construction of the
college mentioned in the autobiography led to an elaborate report
to the trustees. Despite the numerous practical methods he saw
in use, many of which he was able to adopt at Girard, the fact
remains, as Tallmadge points out (22), that with bedroom windows
seeking light from behind a colonnade, it was just such glaring exam-
ples of the inappropriate that led to the downfall of the Greek Revival
style. Jackson (6), however, believes that in these buildings he even
refined on the style he imitated.

The first important document which connects Walter with the
program of Federal buildings in Washington is a Report dated as
early as 1838 (23). He had been directed, he states, to examine the
new Treasury Building, then in progress, as regarded its site, plan,
stability, and effect; also the solidity of the Patent Office, likewise in
progress. He speaks of the delicacy of his problem, being called to
advance opinions on the work of your “venerable and accomplished
architect” (Robert Mills, 1781-1855). He criticizes the site of the
Treasury, pointing out that the space is too limited, and that it mars
the city plan (it and the Library of Congress still make the complete
restoration of the L’Enfant Plan impossible). The first objection
was subsequently removed when the State Department moved to
its present quarters on the other side of the White House (24).
Walter finds the walls are too thin for so large a vaulted building,
having just faced the same problem at Girard. He finds the top
rooms are darkened by the colonnade (the East or Fifteenth Street

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

fagade of the present structure), and the cellar rooms damp and
dark. He criticizes the use of forty-two columns in a continuous
line on an inclined plane as monotonous, though they have been
admired (at least thirty of them) for the same reason. In fine, he
recommends the demolition of the building and its erection elsewhere.
It should be said in Mills’ defense that the site, when the discussion
threatened to be interminable, was determined by the fiat of President
Jackson. As for the Patent Office, Walter found the walls again too
weak. Here he recommended alterations rather than demolition.
He suggested Lafayette Square as a center for government offices, an
idea which is once more coming to the front among the city planners
of Washington, and urged the use of more durable and beautiful mate-
rial in the government buildings than the prevailing Aquia Creek
sandstone. The congressional committee who had called Walter in
as consultant also criticized the materials as inferior, and recom-
mended the use of what could be salvaged from the Treasury in a new
Post Office, needed to take the place of the one just burned. The
matter was tabled.

Next comes the competition for the Capitol Extension in 1850
(24a), (24b). Mills had been the Supervisor of Buildings since
1830. He designed the Treasury and Patent Office, as well as the
Washington Monuments in Baltimore and in Washington. He was
asked to submit drawings for the new wings by the Committee on
Public Buildings, May 28, 1850 (10). They were prepared (10, Pis.
I37*39)- However, a competition was advertised in the “National
Intelligencer,” September 30, 1850. Four designs were chosen from
those sent in and the premium of $500 divided. Of these the design
of one (anonymous) competitor (10, Pis. 141-44) and Walter’s sur-
vive (10, Pis. 145-48). However, from descriptions handed down
the features of each of the four are known.

A merely increased the length of the existing building north and
south, B duplicated the existing structure to the east, C showed the
wings with the east and west axes at right angles to the axis of the
old building, the north and south axes coincident, and D showed the
wings extending farther to the east than to the west of the old
building.

Mills was then instructed to draw a new plan from various sources,
including the four just mentioned. It was recommended that the

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

wings should be attached to the north and south ends of the old build-
ing, that the east and west axes should be at right angles to the north
and south axes, that the west front of the wings should be back
of the west front of the old building, and the east front far beyond
the old east front. In general, the features of the anonymous com-
petitor were adopted.

On the date the competition was advertised Congress had voted,
however, in the Civil and Diplomatic Act, “For the extension of the
Capitol, according to such plans as may be approved by the Presi-
dent, $100,000; to be expended under his direction by such architects
as he may appoint to execute the same” (25). Accordingly, President
Fillmore in his annual message, December, 1851, affirming his author-
ity to approve the plan and appoint the architect, appointed Walter.
On June 10, 1851, he had approved the general outline of Walter’s
plan. Jackson (6) speaks of Mills as retiring at the time on account
of age, and Scarborough records that his death was hastened by his
failure to secure priority (26).

Walter as architect for the Capitol Extension proceeded to draw
various sets of plans, presumably using ideas from all sources. Brown
gives in PI. 147 a modification of his competitive plan, in PI. 140 an
elevation found among Walter’s papers signed by the Corps of Topo-
graphical Engineers, the latter looking surprisingly like the wings as
erected. The third of the post-competitive plans laid before the
President received Fillmore’s approval (10, Pis. 151-54, Senate; Pis.
155-58, House; Pi. 164, north and south front of wings; Pis. 160,
16 1, east and west fronts of wings; Pi. 162, front facing old building;
PI. 163, front behind porticoes). In his first report, December 23,
1851, Walter says, “The architecture of the exterior is designed to
correspond in its principal features to that of the present building, and
the disposition of the various parts is intended to present the appear-
ance of one harmonious structure and to impart dignity to the present
building rather than to interfere with its proportions or detract from
its grandeur or beauty” (10).

Just how skillfully this correlation was done can be seen if one
compares the wings with Latrobe’s center and with Thornton’s fagades
to either side of the center portico. Bulfinch’s dome, of course, gave
way later to Walter’s, which still awaits the extension of the center
to give it as adequate a base as it has silhouette.

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

Before tracing further the course of Walter’s work as architect
of the Capitol Extension, it will be convenient to summarize the
Anderson claims to authorship of the design of the wings. The perti-
nent documents are four pamphlets in the Library of Congress by
Charles Frederick Anderson (27-30), letters in the files of the Art
Curator of the Capitol, and an anonymous article in Architecture (31).
In surveying the evidence, with Anderson’s original drawings lost,
we must conclude that he was not justified in his position. Whatever
the preceding events may have been, once Walter was appointed, he
was justified in using elements from any source he saw fit — the com-
petitors having been premiated, and the President having clearly taken
charge in place of the congressional committees. It may well be that
Anderson through his tireless efforts was influential in causing the
location of the chambers of Senate and House within each wing, and
that some of his ideas of ventilation and acoustics were used in the
construction.

There is only one possibility of a needed review of the matter.
Could the drawing given by Brown, PI. 140, possibly be one of the
“lost” Anderson drawings? The anonymous writer in Architecture
tells how Anderson’s drawings were framed and hung in Anderson’s
office in Washington, rendered beautifully in lead pencil by a friend,
McCoy, an engraver in the office of the Coast Survey. If this possi-
bility is correct, Walter must surrender a considerable share of his
credit for the exterior design of the wings. It should be pointed out,
however, that even if the contingency mentioned finds future support,
Walter cannot be held in any way culpable. Brown points out that
even on the basis of the modified centers (after Meigs’ revisions),
Walter so developed the interiors as to make them his own. And
in the event of the proposed transfer of credit, it would merely mean
that Anderson and Walter are to be called the designers of the wings,
as Hallet and Thornton are now known to have been of the original
design of the building. To raise the suspicion that Walter destroyed
Anderson’s drawing, as the writer in Architecture does, is merely irre-
sponsible use of the documents available. We might add in conclu-
sion that the present head draughtsman in the office of the architect
of the Capitol quotes his grandfather, August Schoenborn, head
draughtsman under both Walter and Clark, as stating in his manuscript
autobiography that Walter designed the wings. As inconvertible, on

173

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

the other hand, is the change made when Meigs took charge (through
Anderson’s efforts or otherwise) as evidenced by the foundations still
visible — made for the outside positions of the chambers, and subse-
quently discarded.

For Walter’s career while architect of the Capitol Extension,
Brown (io) and the Documentary History of the Capitol (32) are
the chief sources. The corner stone was laid July 4, 1851, Daniel
Webster being the orator. An anecdote preserved in the Walter fam-
ily tells of how the statesman used Walter’s MS. for his speech, and
how Walter’s handwriting is now being preserved in the corner stone,
which contains the oration of the occasion. Walter says in his first
Report, December 23, 1851, “The general design and outlines . . . .
were decided on by the President of the United States on the 10th of
June last; and in accordance with his instructions, I proceeded, with-
out delay, to prepare the necessary drawings . . . . ” Almost imme-
diately Congress began hearing and voicing complaints in regard to
frauds, mismanagement, inferior materials, and so on. Brown believes
these fomentings were engineered by the jealous Commissioner of
Public Buildings and Grounds, William Easby, whose authority did
not extend over the rising wings. The investigation which followed
showed evils, frequently attributable to the political activities of the
President and the members of Congress, with the result of the trans-
fer of the project from the Interior to the War Department, and the
appointment of Captain Meigs as superintendent. The investigating
committee then approved Meigs’ changes, chiefly the removal of the
chambers of the Senate and House to the interior of the wings.
Whether through approval, tact, or mere relief at the passage of the
investigation, Walter is quoted as favoring the changes. Clark, Wal-
ter’s successor, is quoted in the Documentary History as crediting to
Meigs also, not only the more effective management, and the regula-
tion of the ventilation and acoustics, but also much of the construction
of the dome.

Walter’s plans for the rebuilding of the Library of Congress, to
embrace the entire western center of the old Capitol, are of interest.
They were made following the fire of December 24, 1851. He
projected a fireproof scheme, principally of iron. In his report to
the Secretary of the Interior, December 28, 1852, he says, “in the
finish of this room I desire to keep to the idea of the whole being

174

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

composed of metal, which could not be done if other than metallic
colors were used.” He is quoted as saying it was the “largest room
made of iron in the world.” In Pis. 169-70 Brown shows this early
example of functionalism, while Pis. 251-533 show the Library as
later built.

Congress continued to criticize, in time including Meigs along with
Walter. The two were soon at logger-heads, each claiming authority.
The controversy came to a climax under Secretary of War Floyd, in
President Buchanan’s administration. Meigs was replaced by Cap-
tain W. B. Franklin, November 1, 1859, and on April 16, 1862, the
management of construction was once more placed in the hands of the
Interior Department, and Walter was left in sole command. With
the work on the building practically complete, the Secretary of the
Interior, May 25, 1865, advised Walter that contracts for the Library
were to be abrogated, and that the Commissioner of Public Buildings
and Grounds would hereafter be in charge. Walter, rather than face
another period of divided authority, resigned May 26, 1865, confident
his former pupil, Edward Clark, and his head draughtsman, August
Schoenborn, were well able to finish the work as designed. The
House, we may note, had been occupied December 13, 1857, and the
Senate, January 4, 1859.

The story of the dome and the development of the grounds will
be traced first in the Documentary History (32). On February 22,
1855, $100,000 was appropriated in the House to construct the new
dome, designed by Walter. When Meigs claimed equal credit with
Walter, the latter reports to Secretary Davis, March 4, 1856, that no
“essential” change had been made over the original drawings. Wal-
ter’s Reports 1862-64 tell of the later steps in the construction, and
are followed by one for 1865 by his successor, Clark. F. L. Olm-
sted, October 1, 1881, writes to Clark of Walter’s approval of his
plans for terraces to the west of the building, and in an interview with
Senator Morrill spoke of his purpose to design the setting of the
building in such a way as to permit the future development of Walter’s
eastern extension. Walter in his 1864 Report gave the reason for
his proposed eastern extension, “Now that the new dome and the
wings of the Capitol are approaching completion, it must be apparent
to every one that the extension of the center building, on the east,
to the line of the new wings, becomes an architectural necessity. I

175

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

have therefore prepared plans for thus completing the work, in har-
mony with what has already been done, and will place them in the
Capitol for future reference.” And Mr. Clark in his 1865 Report
speaks of the imperative need of the extension of the center, which
now had the aspect of inferiority to the wings. He also calls atten-
tion to the apparent insecurity of the dome. Walter’s plans were
modified by Carrere and Hastings in their Report, December 21,
1904. (It may be remarked, parenthetically, that during the 1933
inauguration, the benefit to close views of the dome of the temporary
pavilion built for that occasion before the eastern portico was marked. )
And in 1937 the matter was still being debated by the authorities (38).

Brown (10) gives the drawings of the Walter dome (Pis. 184-
186). The octagonal base rests on the walls of the old dome. Next
comes a peristyle of columns crowned by an entablature. An attic
comes next, then the semi-ellipsoidal dome, the tholus or lantern, and
Crawford’s bronze statue, Liberty. For the inner dome, the rotunda
was left unchanged below the cornice — though Walter often spoke of
replacing the pilasters with columns to increase the apparent support
of the weight (33). The wall was continued above the cornice, with
a recessed band for a frieze of sculpture. A corridor encircled the
rotunda, above the frieze, of piers and engaged columns, and from
its cornice sprang the inner dome, with an opening of sixty-five feet
diameter, showing a colonnade ending at the base of the lantern.

Of Walter’s other works in Washington, we may remark more
briefly. He designed the north, south, and west fronts of the Treas-
ury, completing the granite structure of Mills. Starting in 1855, the
south wing was occupied in 1861, the west wing in 1864, and after
the State Department had vacated its quarters, the north wing in
1869 (24, 35).

Walter also continued Mills’ work at the Old Patent Office, H
and Ninth streets, N. W., adding two wings, complete buildings in
themselves, to the east and west of Mills’ structure. The building was
started in 1837, and Walter finished his additions in 1867. Of the
Doric order and in marble, the pediments and colonnades are propor-
tioned on the Parthenon. Indeed, the simplicity of this copy of an
illustrious model approaches grandeur.

Opposite one-half of the Patent Office at H and Ninth Street,
N. W., is the marble building called the old Post Office, or the Old

176

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

Land Office, and now occupied in part by the Tariff Commission.
Designed by Mills in 1830 (35), it was erected by Walter.

When the State, War, and Navy Building was authorized in 1871,
it was provided that the dimensions and ground plan of the Treasury
should be followed. Walter drew the plans (35), but A. B. Mullett,
the supervising architect of the Treasury, “improved” the exterior
until some nine hundred too many colonettes marred its surface.
Only Walter’s interior plan remained. At present plans are projected
for its remodeling by Waddy Wood, with the exterior once more
brought into harmony with the Treasury, and the interior adapted to
needs of the State Department, now the sole occupant of the structure.

Naval Barracks at Brooklyn, New York, and at Pensacola, Flor-
ida, reported to be the finest in existence at the time of their erection,
also came from Walter’s office while he was in Washington. Like-
wise, the buildings for the government hospital for the insane, St.
Elizabeth’s, Washington. When Walter’s account books now in the
possession of Mrs. Wegemann are examined, many of his private
commissions will no doubt be revealed — churches and private houses,
in particular. That any new attribution will materially change our
judgment of his work, or add outstanding examples to his output, is
unlikely.

WALTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. T. U. Walter, Genealogical Sketches, Philadelphia, 1871.

2. Catalogue of the Franklin Institute Library, Philadelphia, 1876.

3. C. G. Mason, Jr., Memoir of the Late Thomas Ustick Walter, Proceedings,
A. I. A., 1888, New York, 1889.

4. W. Dunlap, Arts of Design, New York, 1834.

5. Mr. Nicholas Biddle and the Architecture of Girard College, Pennsylvania Maga-
zine of History and Biography, XVIII, 1894.

6. J. Jackson, Early Philadelphia Architects and Engineers, Philadelphia, 1923.

7. Journal, Franklin Institute of Philadelphia, Vols. XXV, XXVI (1838) ; Vol.
XXVII (1839); Vols. XXXI, XXXII (1841).

8. T. U. Walter and J. Jay Smith, A Guide to Workers in Metals and Stone, four
volumes, Philadelphia, 1846.

9. J. H. B. Latrobe, The Capitol and Washington, Baltimore, 1882.

10. Glenn Brown, History of the United States Capitol, Washington, 1900-03.

11. W. C. Gold, Among the Makers of Girard College, Steel and Garnet, Girard
College, Philadelphia, n. d.

12. T. U. Walter, Presidential Address, A. I. A., 1879, Boston, 1880.

13. F. Kimball, Domestic Architecture of the American Colonies and of the Early
Republic, New York, 1927.

14. L. C. Tuthill, History of Architecture, Philadelphia, 1848.

15. Rexford Newcomb, Thomas Ustick Walter, Architect, Architecture, X, 1928.

16. J. S. Futhey and G. Cope, History of Chester County, Pennsylvania, Philadel-
phia,1881.

17. I. D. Rupp, History of the Counties of Berks and Lebanon, Lancaster, 1844.

177

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

18. Charleston, South Carolina, in 1883, Boston, 1883.

19. Edward Biddle, Nicholas Biddle . . . . , Proceedings of the Numismatic and
Antiquarian Society of Philadelphia, XXVII (1913-15), Philadelphia, 1916.

20. J. Jackson, Encyclopaedia of Philadelphia (in progress).

21. T. U. Walter, Report .... Upon Present Condition of the Main Building
.... Girard College Grounds, Philadelphia, 1884.

22. T. E. Tallmadge, Story of American Architecture, New York, 1927.

23. T. U. Walter, Report on the New Treasury Buildings and Patent Office at
Washington, Philadelphia, 1838.

24. A History of Public Buildings Under the Control of the Treasury Department,
Washington, 1900.

24a. J. R. Howard, The Architects of the American Capitol, International Review
I (1874).

24b. G. A. Townsend, Washington, Outside and Inside, Cincinnati 1873.

25. C. E. Fairman, Art and Artists of the U. S. Capitol, Washington, 1927.

26. K. Scarborough, The Third Architect of the Capitol Trio, Baltimore Sun, June
28, 1932.

27. C. F. Anderson, Report New York, 1850.

28. C. F. Anderson, Enlargement of the Capitol of the U. S., Washington, 1851.

29. C. F. Anderson, Letter Explanatory of Public and Private Injustice

1861.

30. C. F. Anderson, Testimonials Washington, 1865.

31. Who Was the Architect of the United States Capitol Extension? Architecture,
XXXVI, 1917.

32. Documentary History of the Capitol and Grounds, Washington, 1904.

33. Annual Report of the Superintendent of the U. S. Capitol Grounds and Build-
ings, Washington, 1902.

34. T. F. Hamlin, American Spirit in Architecture, New Haven, 1926.

35. H. P. Caemmerer, Washington, the National Capitol, Washington, 1932.

36. F. Kimball, American Architecture, Indianapolis, 1928.

37. D. McN. Stauffer, American Engravers, New York, 1907.

38. “Building News,” Architectural Record, LXXXI (19 37), April issue.

ILLUSTRATIONS

In addition to the illustrations in Glenn Brown, the Documentary History, and the
1902 Report, already sufficiently referenced, the following list of pertinent illustrations
is appended:

Portraits (oil) by John Neagle, owned by Mrs. C. H. Wegemann, Baltimore (11,
frontispiece) ; (oil) by Francisco Pausas, Office of the Architect of the Capitol (25,
p. 242).

Moyamensing Prison, Philadelphia (6, p. 197).

Girard College, Philadelphia (6 p. 201; 34 p. 133 ; 19 P- 203 from original water-
color made by Walter for Nicholas Biddle; 14 frontispiece). Steel engraving, J. W.
Steel (37, p. 499).

Preston Retreat, Philadelphia (6, p. 203).

Andalusia, Biddle House, Philadelphia (36, p. 101).

Dundas House, Philadelphia (14, PI. XXXI).

Newkirk House (St. George’s Hall), Philadelphia (14, PI. XXXII).

Old Post Office, Washington (34, p. 120; 35, p. 282).

Old Patent Office, Washington (34, p. 134; 35, p. 283).

Treasury Department, Washington (24, pp. 82, 84; 35, pp. 379, 382).

State Department (remodelled), Washington (35, p. 376).

Berks County Courthouse, Reading, Pennsylvania (17, p. 167).

Chester County Courthouse, West Chester, Pennslyvania (16, p. 118).

Hibernian Hall, Charleston, South Carolina (18, following p. 4).

DRAWINGS

In locating Walter drawings it should be borne in mind that before the days of blue
prints it was customary to make duplicate drawings, both signed by the head of the

178

THOMAS U. WALTER AND HIS WORKS

office issuing them. Many of the drawings referred to below, therefore, may involve
duplication.

Miscellanea — Crated, and in the possession of Mrs. C. H. Wegemann, Baltimore.

Sketch Book, “U. S. Capitol Extension,” ibid.

Dome, U. S. Capitol, ibid.

Capitol, Bulfinch dome, ibid.

Capitol, Walter dome, ibid.

Girard College — preliminary conception, ibid.

Girard College — as built, ibid.

Girard College — second preliminary conception, Glenn Cook, Baltimore.

Capitol, Center Extension Project, Walter Cook, Baltimore.

Capitol, Dome, working drawings, College of Architecture, Cornell University.

Dome, U. S. Capitol, elevation, Library of Congress (gift of Misses Walter).

Dome, U. S. Capitol, section, ibid.

Tholus of Dome, U. S. Capitol, elevation, ibid.

Tholus of Dome, U. S. Capitol, section, ibid.

Treasury Department, southwest view, Treasury Department, Office of the Super-
vising Architect.

Treasury Department, South Front, ibid.

Patent Office, numerous drawings, Office of Public Buildings and Parks, Navy
Building.

Capitol, numerous drawings, Office of the Architect (partly on deposit and partly by
purchase from the Misses Walter).

Drawings of Girard College, the Philadelphia County Prison, etc. (22), Pennsyl-
vania Historical Society.

179

JS1

P oet~ Ad venturer

George Sand

By Richard Beale Davis, Mary Washington College,
Fredericksburg, Virginia

dom. 1643.

N the parish register of an old Kentish church is a curiously
extravagant entry:

Georgius Sandy s, poetarum Anglorum sui saeculi
facile princeps, sepultus fuit Martii 7 stylo Anglic Anno

Yet few critics before the nineteenth century would have found
fault with this casually asserted claim to supremacy. John Dryden
repeated almost the same words. Even Alexander Pope and Joseph
Warton agreed with few limitations.

Contemporaries less literary than the author of the recorded
entry remembered Sandys for other reasons. He was an entertain-
ing raconteur of travels in the East, a favorite courtier of Charles I,
and a pious author of paraphrases of the scriptures. But much of
this has been forgotten. When he is occasionally recalled today it is
for his part in American Colonial history, as a resident official of the
Virginia settlement during its most crucial years, and as the first
Englishman to find in the New World the time and the ability to
write poetry.

These things alone present him as one of the most versatile and
accomplished figures of his age. And Sandys is an individual in
character as he is versatile in accomplishment. Few Elizabethan or
Stuart gentlemen combined more paradoxes than this hot-tempered,
whimsical, shrewd, worldly, and pious adventurer. Here was a man
who took equal interest in exterminating Indian communities, wor-
shipping at the Holy Sepulchre, and polishing the English couplet.

Historians during the last three-quarters of a century have given
Sandys some little recognition. No one of them, however, seems to
have emphasized the most significant and fascinating things about
him. For Sandys is the sole Elizabethan poet-adventurer of the
Sidney-Raleigh tradition to take an active personal part in the earliest

180

GEORGE S ANDYS

(From the copy in the Bayley-Tiffany Art Museum of the University of Virginia. Original by
Cornelis Janssen)

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

development of the British colonial empire, and the only one to prove
the practical virility of this peculiarly Renaissance upbringing amid
the severities of a pioneer community.

Hereditary at the very start supplied at least two of George
Sandys’ most characteristic qualities. His father, Edwin Sandys
(1516?- 1588), was one of the soundest scholars and most persistent
squabblers of the first half of Elizabeth’s reign. As a bishop, Edwin
is said to have “delighted the queen early”: certainly she must have
had the fullest sympathy for both of these obvious elements of his
character. Edwin also had the doubtful honor of having suggested,
as a political expedient, the murder of Mary Queen of Scots. Con-
sequentially or not, when the clergyman’s seventh and youngest son
George was born in 1578, the child’s father was Archbishop of York.
And a short time later, when the child was christened, its godparents
were among the great nobles of the realm: George Earl of Cum-

berland, William Lord Ewer, and Catherine, Countess of Huntingdon.

The Archbishop’s personal influence on this last son was prob-
ably, however, but little. He died when George was under eleven.
There is interesting evidence that even in death the prelate wished to
guide this son’s life, for the will urges strongly that George shall, at
the proper time, take unto himself a specifically named and financially
well-endowed wife. Be this as it may, the advice, or command, seems
never to have been heeded.

A living older brother could have more influence than a dead
father — and did. The archbishop’s second son and namesake, six-
teen years George’s senior, was already one of the eminent men of
the kingdom when George reached his majority. Scholar and states-
man, close friend of Richard Hooker and George Cranmer, the sec-
ond Edwin had from the beginning supported James’ claim to the
throne. As one of the band accompanying the new King from Scot-
land to England, he received a knighthood. Like his father before
him, he thus early made a secure place for himself and his family in
the good graces of the sovereign. Although active in the affairs of
trade with the East Indies and Japan, he devoted most of his ener-
gies to the Virginia Company. He served as a member of the council
for Virginia in 1607, and as its treasurer from 1619 to 1621. He

181

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

was primarily responsible for the establishment of the first institu-
tion of higher learning in English America, the missionary college
at Henrico. Through him also the Leyden exiles were permitted to
settle within the territories of the Virginia Company. Edwin and
George Sandys did not always agree, especially in problems of Colo-
nial administration, but the younger George always showed admira-
tion and respect for his brother’s opinions and abilities. Above all,
the two shared an intense interest in colonization and travel.

But most of this was still in the future when the youngest Sandys
was growing up. Even in his teens, it would seem, the boy had an
eye on both a public and a scholarly career. Entering St. Mary’s
Hall, Oxford, at the precocious age of twelve, he probably remained
in the university for seven years, a much longer time than was usually
necessary for a degree. Evidently someone, Edwin br perhaps
George himself, believed in strenuous preparation. In 1596 George
turned from the academic to the legal and entered the Middle Tem-
ple. This is the last official record of his whereabouts before 1610,
but from the learning later displayed, it is probable that he spent
many of the intervening years as Milton spent the period at Hor-
ton, in further study and seclusion. At this time also he became
acquainted at court, and for the rest of his life was the admirer and
personal friend of Prince Charles, who later as King made him one
of the Gentlemen of the Privy Chamber.

By 1610 the thirty-two-year-old Sandys, a scholarly sophisticate,
was ready to begin the travels which many of his contemporaries had
undertaken at an earlier age. Although the European tour was a
customary adjunct of formal education, George Sandys’ itinerary
and his purpose in journeying were both unusual. He resolved to see
and experience and record things with which even the educated among
his fellow-countrymen were unfamiliar.

In resolving to write of his experiences he seems to have been
somewhat influenced by what his brother Edwin had done before
him. From 1593 to 1599 Edwin had travelled in Europe, sojourning
for some time in Venice. There Fra Paoli Sarpi aided him in the com-
position of the volume which was the raison d’etre of his travels, a
treatise on the religious state of Europe known as the Eu^opa
Speculum.

When George set forth, he wandered through France and the
Rhine country in the customary way, with Venice as his first destina-

182

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

tion. Here where most travellers turned back he felt that he would
begin, and here he began to jot down the notes for what was to
become one of the most popular travel books of the century, A Rela-
tion of a Journey Begun An: Dom: 1610 (1615). Dedicated like
all his later works to Charles, then Prince of Wales, the Relation
was unconcerned with religious problems such as those discussed in
Edwin’s book. The observant George was interested in giving his
English reader an authoritative yet popular picture of regions less
familiar than Southern and Western Europe: "France I forbeare to

speak of, and the lesse remote parts of Italy: daily survaide and
exactly related. At Venice I will begin my Iournal. From whence
we on the 20 of August, 1610, in the Little Defence of London.”

Through a twelvemonth he wandered on, travelling through the
Turkish Empire, Egypt, and the Holy Land, observing with the eye
of the scientist and the scholar. Sometimes his meditations remind
the reader that he lived in a deeply religious age. Occasionally he
was guilty of a little padding from ancient travel books, but on the
whole he was portraying what he saw. His account of the pyramids
and his vivid description of the Holy Sepulchre prove the accuracy
of his observation and the poetic simplicity of his piety. And prob-
lems of transportation and news transmission were of equal power to
attract his attention — for example, the pigeon-carrier service between
Aleppo and Babylon which Izaak Walton learned from him and used
in the Compleat Angler.

But Sandys was not merely an intelligent sightseer and curiosity-
seeker. Before returning to England, he stopped at Rome and spent
a considerable period studying its antiquities under Nicholas Fitz-
herbert. There also he became proficient in several languages and
imbued with a mass of classical lore much more comprehensive than
he had received in his English university training and independent
studies at home. Over a century later Gibbon went out of his way
to praise the fidelity and value of Sandys’ picture of the East, par-
ticularly of Jerusalem, in his time, and of the Italian antiquities.

There were at least five editions of the Relation during the seven-
teenth century, and there was an extract in Purchas’ Pilgrimes (1625,
Part 2). This book alone gave Sandys a respected position among
the scholarly travellers of his day. Anthony Wood says that Sandys
returned from his journeyings a fluent linguist, a delightful conver-

183

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

sationalist, and “he also had [then] a poetical fancy and a zealous
inclination to all human learning, which made his company acceptable
to most virtuous men and scholars.” Bishop King (in the Introduc-
tion to one of Sandys’ later writings) was able to compare him with
his brother Edwin and his father Edwin :

.... And scarcely have two brothers farther borne
A father’s name, or with more value worn
Their own, than two of you; whose pens and feet
Have made the distant points of heaven to meet :

He by exact discoveries of the West [Edwin’s Europa Speculum ]
Yourself by painful travels to the East ....

Thus George Sandys completed training for the great work of
his life. For he himself said he spent his best years and efforts in
the Colony of Virginia.

In 1621 the Virginia Company of London proceeded to the elec-
tion of a new resident Governor for its fourteen-year-old Colony.
It chose Sir Francis Wyatt, a nephew-in-law of one of its veteran offi-
cials, Sir Edwin Sandys, and of the traveller George Sandys. Wyatt
was in personal ability and experience well fitted for his post. The
Colony was growing, however, and the company felt the need of an
additional responsible official at Jamestown who might share the
administrative burden. It decided to create the office of resident
treasurer, the duties of which would include accounting for all exports
and imports of the Colony, control over staple commodities, promo-
tion of industry, and executive and judicial authority as a member
of the Colonial Council. To this new position it elected George
Sandys.

There were many good reasons for the choice. In the first place,
the new treasurer came of an influential family. And his brother
Sir Edwin, as mentioned above, had been for years a principal pro-
moter and governor of the London Company. Then George Sandys
himself had shown a marked interest in colonization, for he had
owned (prior to 1621) shares in the Bermuda Company and in the
Virginia Company, and had made, in 1619, an attempt to obtain the
Governorship of the Bermudas. He and his relative, Sir Francis
Wyatt, not too far apart in age, had always been on good terms.

184

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

They might be expected to work well together. Sandys was a world-
renowned traveller who would find strange conditions of life and
behaviour nothing new. He had already impressed those who knew
him with his sound good sense. Above all, he had always been a
friend of Prince Charles, as shown in the dedication of the Relation,
and of the Earl of Southampton, greatest power in the Virginia
Company.

Which among these reasons had most weight it is impossible to
say. At any rate the minutes of the company leave no doubt that its
members were more than content with their selection :

.... It pleased my Lo : of Southampton to propose a gentle-
man well knowne unto them all as a man very fitt to take that charge
upon him namely Mr. George Sandys who was indeed so well reputed
of, for his approved fidelity sufficiency and integrity: as they con-
ceaued a fitter man could not be chosen for that place and therupon
agreed to his eleccon. . . .

A month or two later, in the company of Wyatt and other officials,
the forty-four-year-old Sandys embarked for the New World. Besides
his instructions and certificate of authority, he carried with him a
portion of his most ambitious literary effort, the first five books of
the translation into English verse of Ovid’s Metamorphoses. His
friend Michael Drayton, admiring the fragment, then gave the famous
encouragement :

And worthy George, by industry and use,

Let’s see, what lines Virginia will produce
Go on with Ovid, as you have begun
Glib as the former so shall it live long,

And do much honor to the English tongue

The voyage was long, and rather stormy. But the new treasurer
was never idle. Mapping his plans for the new office, perusing care-
fully the earlier records of the Colony, he began to realize the mag-
nitude and responsibilities of his task. His mind teemed with ideas
he hoped would become practical realities. But for the time the
bulwarks of the ship confined him, and he returned to poetry for his
recreation. “Yet amongst the roreing of the seas, the rustling of
the shrowdes, and clamour of Saylers I translated two books,” he
wrote a friend at home. Therefore the new official, known usually

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

in the records as “Mr. Thresurer,” rowed ashore in America, in early
spring, with seven books of the Metamorphoses already in English.
“ I will perhaps, when the sweltering heat of the day con-

fines me to my Chamber, give a further essayee, for which if I be
taxt — I have noe other excuse but that it was the recreacon of my
idle howers ....’’

Thus the first consciously artistic literary production of America
came into being in the spare time of the hardest working official of a
busy Colony. The Treasurer found the idle hours few and far
between, even if his accomplishments were only those recorded by the
company itself. As he stated later in his dedication of the complete
Ovid (1626) to his master Charles:

Your gracious acceptance of the first fruits of my travels, when
you were our hope, as now our happiness, hath actuated both will and
power to the finishing of this piece, being limned by that imperfect
light which was snatcht from the hours of night and repose. For the
day was not mine, but dedicated to the service of your great father
and yourself ....

The first year of Wyatt’s governorship was the most promising
and prosperous, up to that time, in the Colony’s history. Twenty-one
ships arrived, bringing thirteen hundred settlers and a demand for
land and supplies. New problems of both settlement and govern-
ment arose.

Setting out to organize the pecuniary affairs of the dominion, the
Treasurer found himself quickly adopting the point of view of the
Colony as opposed to that of the governing body back in London.
By this time even the company officials in England had begun to real-
ize that the prosperity, even salvation, of this new settlement lay in
making it a successful and self-supporting, perhaps self-sustaining
community. Sandys had come over with this in mind, but he soon
began criticizing the long distance administrative policies of his
brother Sir Edwin and other London officials. He felt, and others
with him, that the company’s material support had been niggardly.
The magazine of clothing, hardware, farming implements, and Eng-
lish foodstuffs was always meager, and frequently in danger of run-
ning out entirely. He urged the agents of the company at home, his
friend Samuel Wrote and the company deputy Nicholas Ferrar, to

186

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

establish a policy of continuous and ample support in basic materials.
Only thus, he argued, might the Colony succeed and the company
realize on its initial investments.

A fifteen hundred acre estate and a retinue of servants were
accompaniments of the Treasurer’s office. When Sandys arrived the
land had not been set aside. The servants, however, were already on
hand, for many of them had accompanied him from England. Real-
izing at once that they should be kept busy, the Treasurer purchased
a two hundred acre plot in his own name and put his retainers to
work there. While the red tape necessary in securing the larger tract
was slowly unwound, Sandys and his servants had begun to build, to
clear land, and to cultivate.

Sandys was determined to carry out the company’s major policies,
especially the idea of diversifying agriculture and industry as much
as possible. Tobacco was beginning to be lucrative, but the London
officials insisted that vineyards and mulberry trees for silk culture
should be planted, and that, as soon as raw materials, mineral and
otherwise, might be found, that manufactures should be set up. These
manufactures would facilitate trade with the Indians, employ inden-
tured labor, and furnish some product for shipment home. Also cer-
tain members of the corporation, particularly Edwin Sandys, for pious
and perhaps diplomatic and economic reasons, had resolved on the
establishment of a missionary college for the Indians at Henrico.

It was the company’s custom to assign to each member of the resi-
dent council direct responsibility for some particular activity of the
Colony. For example, one gentleman would assume the superintend-
ency of the brick-making industry, which was to benefit all the set-
tlers. It is indicative of the London officials’ confidence in George
Sandys that, besides his official duties as Treasurer, he was from the
start made superintendent or alternate in the development of more
than a half dozen of these projects. Thus within six months after
his arrival he was cultivating two plantations, overseeing two new
agricultural pursuits, encouraging in persona industry of several kinds,
handling the financial affairs of an expanding Colony, and in the hours
snatched from night and repose, rendering his Roman poet into
melodious English verse.

It is hardly amazing that the minutes of the company’s court
were within this same period beginning to record the Treasurer’s dif-

187

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

Acuities with his neighbors. Sandys came of a disputatious family;
he was an aristocrat in race and mind, surrounded by the ignorant
and the vulgar; and he was an overworked official on whom blame
rather than praise was liable to be cast. The disputes over owner-
ship of land, payment of fees for a servant’s transportation, and
validity of certain debts were frequent, as were the easily understand-
able complaints about the overbearing disposition of “Mr. Treasurer.”
Yet there is little record, then or later, of personal quarrel with his
social and intellectual equals in America or in England.

But for Sandys and the entire settlement these little disturbances
were but the calm before the storm. The whites, growing bolder
through familiarity with the land and the natives and the increasing
number of colonists, had begun to strike into the wilderness. In
small groups or in single families they established themselves and
their tobacco-bought brides many miles from Jamestown — even sev-
eral furlongs from their nearest neighbors.

The blow fell suddenly, and but for one Indian servant who had
been kindly treated by a white master, the history of colonization on
this continent might be very different. By any accounting, the mas-
sacre of 1622 was a severe blow to a young and struggling commu-
nity. The outpost communities were wiped out, and the few survi-
vors in the outlying districts hurried to Jamestown, and for some
time refused to leave the stockade.

Conditions outside the little capital were utterly disheartening.
The blackened log houses and charred human bones were horrible
evidence of the sufferings of the families and friends of the survivors.
The college at Henrico was destroyed, and what might have been
Virginia’s Harvard was gone forever. Crops had been uprooted or
burnt. The infant industries were abandoned. “Silk-worm seed”
and mulberry trees were also lost, and their French and Italian cul-
tivators huddled in terrified silence behind the walls of the fort.

Something had to be done. The first move was good strategy —
a series of swift and merciless raids against the Indian villages. Los-
ing no time, waiting for no help from England, little bands of hardy
settlers marched out to give the red man a return lesson.

Although there were in the Colony many men with military expe-
rience, veterans of the wars of Elizabeth and James, it is significant
that the first of the expeditions was led by a civilian, the company

188

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

treasurer. Before Sir George Yeardley, Captain William Powell, or
Captain John West set out against the tribes, Sandys had conducted
several raids on the “Tappahatonaks,” the tribes opposite James-
town. Although comparatively few Indians were killed, their vil-
lages were destroyed and their fields burnt. Most important, their
morale was broken.

Ever after Sandys was known among his English contemporaries
as “brave Master Sandys.” Part of this reputation for courage came
no doubt from the unknown “ballet-writer” who sent Good Newes
from, Virginia to London in 1623. Two of the stanzas of this neg-
lected masterpiece give the Treasurer much credit:

Stout Master George Sandys upon a night did bravely venture forth
And mong’st the Savage murtherers did forme a deed of worth
For finding many by a fire to death their lives they pay
Set fire of a town of theirs and bravely came away

From lames his Towne well shipt and stord with men and victualle
store

Up Nan-Somond river they saile long ere they came to shore

Who landing slew those enemies that massacred our men

Tooke prisoners corne & burnt their townes and came abord agen

These punitive expeditions having accomplished their purpose
and the Indians quiet, Council and Colony paused to take breath.
The pause was but momentary, for the hardy and hard-headed adven-
turers hurried into the work of rehabilitation. Anxious to forget the
horrors through which they had so recently lived, they plunged per-
haps too hastily, for they lacked materials and manpower more than
ever.

It was in this situation that George Sandys again, and more than
ever, proved himself the most level-headed and far-sighted of the
Colonial officials of his day. If he had not written a paragraph of
his travels or a line of his verse, he deserves remembrance for his
constructive contributions to empire building in Virginia from 1623
to 1628.

In the same letters in which he informed the home officials of
the details of the catastrophe and gave a summary of the financial
condition of the Colony, he outlined his plans. He demanded new
supplies and more supplies, and he urged the reestablishment of old
industries and the introduction of certain new ones. It was primarily

189

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

a development of the company’s earlier policy, but the new indus-
tries Sandys proposed were very different from most of the old. Also
he assured the company that its policy of diversified agriculture was
worth continuing. Strangely enough, for the London group were
usually reluctant to follow suggestions from the Colony, his advice
was heeded, and he found himself increasingly busy. With him rested
much of the burden of proof of the sound practicality of his
recommendations.

First he gave his attention to his own lands, for he felt he must
set an example by a return to agriculture. With his seventeen hired
and indentured servants he set determinedly to work. The grape,
the mulberry, tobacco, and Indian corn were assiduously cultivated.
Such a model farmer was he that in a year or two “Mr. George
Sandys, the Treasurer,” reported one hundred barrels of corn as
his seasonal harvest, a good thirty barrels more than the yield of
Abraham Peirsey, his nearest rival in the entire Colony.

Then he undertook to arouse new interest in an earlier project,
silk production. The year before he had begged his friend Wrote,
the company agent, to send “two Frenchmen skillful in silke wormes
and planting of vines.” He assured the agent that they would be
well paid. They were, but they earned it. Without a permanent
residence of his own, Sandys established himself in a large room in
the Elizabeth City home of Captain William Pierce, or Persey. There
he himself experimented with silk worms for months on end, and
there he kept the two protesting Frenchmen hard at work, compell-
ing their attention to the problem.

Believing that Virginia was ideally suited for grape culture, and
backed by a law of the Assembly passed at his insistence, Sandys
encouraged the planting of vineyards. In this also he kept his French-
men at work, and in his letters home urged more and more shipments
of seeds and slips.

In mechanical innovation which might aid agriculture he had
an eager interest. “The good example .... of Mr Thresurer” in
“the Erectinge of a water mill,” the first in Virginia, was much com-
mended by the company at home. They hoped it might persuade
others to do likewise.

The London officials also gave Sandys credit for originating
another interesting manufacture — shipbuilding. In a letter to the

190

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

Governor and Council warmly approving the undertaking they ask :
“And as of all in general so in pticular, we verie earnestlie request
Mr George Sandys from whom at first this project in part moued to
have an especial regard unto the proceedinge thereof . ... "

Glassmaking under Captain William Norton and his Italian help-
ers was considered one of the vital industries of the Colony. Beads
were their chief manufacture, for beads were necessary in trading
with the Indians. As in other activities, if anything happened to the
superintendent, Sandys was to be in charge. Whether the captain
was slain in the massacre or not, Sandys was directing the industry
by 1623; for in that year he sent a shallop and crew as far up the
James as the Falls in search of sand suitable for the furnaces, finally
procuring it in the opposite direction at Cape Henry. The work-
men were always troublesome, sometimes demanding return to Europe
and sometimes quarreling among themselves. The exasperated Sandys
wrote Ferrar that “a more damned crew Hell never vomited.”

Sandys and a companion explored all the waterways, rivers, and
bays in search of a suitable site for an iron furnace, rightly deemed
an industry essential for the self-protection as well as the prosperity
of the Colony. “Mr. John Berkley and Mr. George Sandys state
that the falling creek was so fitting for the Iron works, as if Nature
had applied herself to the wish and direction of the workman.”

Since these and others like them were extra-official or semi-official
duties, Sandys’ labors were hardly begun when he had dealt with
them. The urgent and continuous necessity for food and arms from
abroad; the need for skilled French, Italian, and Dutch laborers;
and the tobacco accounts were in themselves sufficient to keep the
Treasurer at the order or accounting sheets day and night. In addi-
tion, he had to warn the English agent against “Dupper” and other
profiteers who had sent the Colonists inferior commodities such as
“the stinking beer” which “hath been the death of two hundred”;
take under his own wing any young scapegrace of influence who had
come to see the new land (as Mr. Calthorpe, who persisted in asso-
ciating with the rowdies of Jamestown, who hung about him until the
last of the good liquor the fine cavalier had brought with him had
been consumed) ; and above all, convince the deputies that a small
tobacco export in a given year was not the malice aforethought of the
Colonial planters.

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

All these things Sandys found it necessary or interesting to dis-
cuss with John and Nicholas Ferrar, Samuel Wrote, and his brothers
Samuel and Myles Sandys. In official or personal correspondence he
was always tactful and courteous, and humorous more in the modern
than in the Elizabethan sense. Perhaps this sense of humor is the
key to his American accomplishments. Because of it pioneer stupidity
and crudity, even though irritating, never became intolerable.

In the midst of all these tumults and alarums the two great and
appealing factors of life for Sandys — adventure and poetry — were
neither neglected nor forgotten. His interest in the first is evident
in his letters. Diplomatic’ missions to the Indian tribes, the busy
activities of his office, the land itself were all in a sense adventure.
But romantic adventure, the appeal of far off things, was also as
much a part of him now as in his youth. Every one of these first
Colonists had somewhere in the back or the front of his mind the
North-West passage, the path to a land of gold and glory. Sandys’
expedition to the red man had not been all military or diplomatic. In
his epistle to John Ferrar of April 8, 1623, he glowed with enthusi-
asm. “Great are the likelihoods of the vicinity of the South Sea by a
general report of the Indians. The mountains they say not being
past four days’ journey above the falls.” He concluded by offering,
willingly, if he might be furnished with the means, to venture his life
in the discovery. That the means were never forthcoming must cer-
tainly have been a disappointment.

His second mistress, poetry, was less elusive, for he made it within
his own power to woo her directly. In the very room at Captain
Pierce’s in which he supervised his silk worm workers, he continued
his translation of Ovid. Through the first months of 1621 and
1622, through the massacre period of 1622, on to 1626, he labored
unremittingly. When the completed work appeared in England, the
author felt the circumstances of its production were so unusual that
they might form an excuse for any crudities of form. In the dedica-
tion to King Charles he alludes to the environment from whence his
work had come :

It [the Ovid] needeth more than a single denization, being a
double stranger : sprung from the stock of the ancient Romans, but
bred in the New-World, of the rudeness of which it cannot partici-
pate : especially having wars and tumults to bring it to light, instead
of the Muses

192

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

Sandys had been reappointed when the Crown took over control
of the Colony in 1624, and again in 1626, and appears to have
remained in Virginia until 1628. In 1626, perhaps in connection with his
reappointment, he made a trip home to England. In that year appeared
the first complete edition of the fifteen books of the Metamorphoses,
including the interesting and significant dedication to the King, a
translation of one book of the Aeneid, and a series of laudatory intro-
ductory poems by famous contemporaries.

The accomplishment is astonishing even today. Within four and
a half years, the painfully busy Colonist had been able to translate at
least eight books (not counting the two done aboard ship on the way
over) and polish and prepare the whole fifteen for publication. And
what is more important, the poet was producing some of the best
work of his generation. Dryden called him “the best versifier of the
former age”; Fuller said the poems were “spriteful, vigorous, and
masculine,” which he might also have said of Sandys himself. War-
ton and Pope, as well as his most talented contemporaries, acknowl-
edged the fine quality of his translation.

Although it is not the purpose of this sketch to criticize Sandys’
Ovid, one should observe that the work was so popular that it had
reached its eighth edition by 1690, and that the couplet employed
is given an important part in the development of English verse. Inci-
dentally, Dryden is said to have stated that, had Sandys continued
the translation of the Aeneid beyond the one book included with the
Ovid, he would never have attempted his own Vergil. Thus, with
Sandys, Drayton’s prophetic stanza in the Ode to the Virginian Voy-
age had become reality:

And as there plenty grows
Of laurel everywhere
Apollo’s sacred tree,

You, it may see,

A poet’s brows

To crown, that may sing there

III

Two years after the publication of the Ovid, Sandys was back in
England to stay. A new Governor had come to Virginia who failed
to understand or appreciate the irascible Treasurer. Each official

193

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

complained of the other, and in the end Sandys came home. There
is no question of governmental disgrace or disapproval of any sort,
for almost immediately Sandys became a gentleman of the privy
chamber to his patron Charles I.

Though the poet’s physical adventures were almost over, in mind
and spirit he remained active and vigorous for another fifteen years.
The Colony always interested him. When a special commission for
“the better plantation of Virginia’’ was appointed in 1631, Sandys
petitioned for the post of Secretary, on the ground that he had
“spent his ripest years in the public employment” in the Colony.
Although his application failed, his efforts did not go unappreciated.
In 1640, the Virginia Assembly, seeking restoration of its ancient
charter rights, appointed him its representative in England. Sandys,
knowing the King’s temper, presented the Assembly’s petition to Par-
liament instead of to his friend Charles, and the charter was renewed.
The King, much disturbed, supplanted Governor Wyatt (then in
office a second time) with the royalist Sir Francis Berkeley. The
new Governor, wishing to please His Majesty, convened a new Assem-
bly at Jamestown. Under his insistence this body protested the
renewal of the charter, assuring Charles that Sandys in presenting
the earlier petition “had mistook his instructions.” Close as Sandys
was to the King, it is a tribute to the sincerity of his interest in the
Colony’s welfare that he should have acted in opposition to his
master’s policy.

But the Colony was certainly not going to occupy all his time in
England when it had not done so in America. Social and literary
life, his friends and his writings, became his consuming interests. At
Charles’ court he had fallen in with Lucius Cary, second Viscount
Falkland, who held a position similar to his own. Soon Sandys joined
the circle of Falkland and the latter’s friends at Great Tew, in
Oxfordshire, and enjoyed the companionship of the greatest poets
and scholars of his generation. There he met Dudley Digges,
Thomas Carew, Edmund Waller, Henry King, and others as witty
and as talented. Since Sandys’ niece Anne, who had married Sir
Francis Wenman, lived at Carswell, no great distance from Tew,
the aging man was able to divide much of his time most pleasantly
between his relatives and his friends.

Stimulated by his literary conversations, Sandys once again took
up his pen. “Scratch the Cavalier and find the Puritan beneath” is

194

GEORGE SANDYS, POET-ADVENTURER

borne out in his last writings. The curious traveller, the Renaissance
scholar, the worldly adventurer now tuned his lyre to sing the songs
of Zion. Between 1635 and his death he wrote and published a beau-
tiful Paraphrase of David’s Psalms and Paraphrase of the Song of
Solomon, and he rendered into English from the Latin of Grotius
the remarkable Christ’s Passion. The great Dutch scholar is said to
have been much pleased with Sandys’ adaptation, and the Paraphrases
were as popular as the Relation and the Ovid had been. As an intro-
duction to the Paraphrases there are a series of commendatory poems
from the Falkland circle, including Waller, Carew, King, and Wyatt.
Henry Lawes set many of them to music, and the little volume of the
Psalms was one of Charles’ favorite books in his last hours, hours
which fortunately the King’s devoted admirer did not live to see.

For the busy life was drawing to a close, and even the songs of
praise to his Creator had been sung. Sandys was in Savoy in 1641 —
an old dog basking in the sun. There Fuller saw him, and was
impressed by the “youthful soul in a decayed body.” The very last
years were spent in England, at Boxley Abbey, the home of another
niece, Lady Wyatt, and of his old companion-in-arms, Sir Francis.
There in future time the curious were pleased “to see upon the old
stone wall in the garden a summer house with this inscription in great
golden letters, that in that place Mr. G. Sandys after his travels over
the world retired himself for his poetry and contemplations, and none
are fitter to retire to God than such as are tired with seeing all the
vanities on earth.”

The adventure was over, and at Boxley was he buried. Scholar,
traveller, colonist, courtier, statesman, the first man of letters in
America, at the end he humbly thanked his God that

Thou brought’st me home in safety; that this earth
Might bury me, which fed me from my birth
Blest with a healthful age; a quiet mind,

Content with little ....

195

Aspkalt — Origin, History, Develop-
ment— Its Relation to PetroL

eum

By Joseph Rock Draney,* New York

, if any, materials have had a more colorful history
n asphalt. There is nothing of the drab or prosaic
)ut its rise. Interspersed with this history there have
n international complications involving plots and coun-
ter plots. During the ’eighties and ’nineties and for a while past the
turn of the century, court fights, injunction suits by taxpayers, together
with keen bitter rivalry among asphalt paving concerns, filled news-
paper columns upon many occasions. To the layman asphalt conveys
an impression of dense hurrying traffic and that it all comes from
Trinidad in the colorful Spanish Main. Nothing could be more con-
stricted in conception, both as to the origin and greatly diversified
utilization of this remarkably versatile product. “A mighty contribu-
tor to general welfare” may be correctly stated about it.

What is asphalt? Whence came it? Those queries have been
enunciated myriad times. The Greeks had a word for it, meaning
firm, secure, stable. It is the purpose of this narrative to define those
queries in as clarified a manner as may be possible, eliminating highly
technical phraseology. The chemical engineer will say that asphalt
is composed of a series of cyclic hydro-carbons. But suffice it for the
layman to know that asphalt is a black, sticky, viscous substance in
liquid, solid or semi-solid form. Asphalt is called a bitumen, though
it is not related to other materials which are classified under the
generic term bituminous. Basically, asphalt — in no matter what form
it may be — is derived from petroleum. Whether as rock asphalt,
lake asphalt, hard native asphalt or as a residual from distillation, it
nevertheless is primarily a derivative of petroleum.

As a non-volatile hydro-carbon held in solution by volatile oils,
convulsions of nature evaporated the lighter oils, forcing the hydro-

*President, The Asphalt Association, 1919-25 ; Vice-President, The American Road
Builders Association, 1930.

196

tmmm

FRONT OF CAPITOL, WASHINGTON,

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

carbon (asphalt) up through rock, earth (seepages) and in one case,
importantly, through an extinct volcano. The foregoing refers to
rock asphalt, lake asphalt, hard native asphalt and in general where
asphalt occurs in nature. By far the preponderant production of
asphalt comes through the hand of man in the distillation of asphaltic
petroleum by modern refining processes. During a period some years
ago there were those who stigmatized the production of asphalt
directly from petroleum as “artificial asphalt,” “man-made asphalt,”
“synthetic asphalt,” a “residual,” and so on. The March of Time
generally answers the questions of yesteryear, so the critics of oil
asphalt of that era shortly preceding the World War have, like the
Arabs of the poem, folded their tents and stolen away in the night.
Why? Because oil asphalts to the metre of millions of tons annually,
produced under the scientific supervision of technologists, occupy pre-
dominantly the space of the asphalt industry.

Reverting to the Genesis of asphalt, it may be pointed out, that
in the evaporation of volatile oils, whether by natural or artificial
processes, such residual hydro-carbon (asphalt) is there, despite the
heat, natural or artificial which, drove away the lighter oils. There-
fore this residue (asphalt) proved its immunity to forces of nature
first, which accounts for its virtue as a preservative and protectant.
There is a legend that some two hundred thousand years ago a
Mastodon was stuck in a pool of asphalt. His preserved bones are
part of an exhibit in the Museum of Natural History, Los Angeles.
The museum report ascribes this preservation to asphalt, saying “the
bones were saturated with the best known of all preservatives.”
Down through the ages it is recorded that the ancients employed this
substance for many and varied purposes, to either bind, or pre-
serve, or both. The ancients waterproofed embankments and sub-
structures, preserved mummies, made asphaltic bricks, mortar and
in various ways are said to have employed asphalt, making objects
of art and figures of unusual form and design. The Sumerians, Per-
sians, Egyptians, Babylonians, Greeks and Romans had a hand in
the early devices wrought from this most unusual and extraordinary
material.

Skipping over centuries of time, nothing seems to have happened
or was recorded until the fore part of the eighteenth century. Europe
then comes into the picture with the development of rock asphalt.

197

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

The Val de Travers, Switzerland; the Limmer, Germany; Seyssel,
France, and Sicilian, Italy are chiefly mentioned. Some of the Euro-
pean capitals used it, commencing about 1850, and to a moderate
extent America employed it. However, this work consisted mostly
in paving cellar floors, station platforms, etc. In the final analysis,
European Rock Asphalt has been a negligible quantity, comparatively.
In America, rock asphalts are indigenous to Alabama, California,
Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah. The product from
Alabama, Kentucky and Texas has shown continual activity in reach-
ing the market for highway materials.

Trinidad Pitch Lake — Sir Walter Raleigh in 1595 discov-
ered an island which became known as Trinidad, British West Indies.
It lay slightly east by north from the coast of South America, the
nearest country being Venezuela. On this island there was found a
deposit of pitch (asphalt) and the deposit became known as one of
the wonders of the world. History was made by this famous asphalt
lake. Philip W. Henry, an eminent consulting engineer, now an
executive of the American Institute of Consulting Engineers, was
years ago general manager of the lake operations in his capacity as
an executive of the Barber Asphalt Paving Company. Herewith is
quoted excerpts from a report made on the pitch lake by Mr. Henry
in 1893:

The deposit of pitch lake occupies a bowl-like depression, prob-
ably the center of an extinct mud volcano, some of which are found in
other parts of the island. The center of the deposit is about three-
quarters of a mile from the Gulf of Paria and about 135 feet above
the level of the sea, making it easy of access and simplifying the ques-
tion of shipment. The surface is hard enough, except in irregular
patches in the center, to bear the weights of carts and mules. It is
necessary, however, for one to keep moving, otherwise he sinks in
the material which, under the hot rays of the sun becomes quite
mobile, although not sticky, owing to the large amount of water
which it contains. The surface of the deposit is divided into irregu-
lar areas, from 60 to 150 feet in diameter, separated by crevices sev-
eral feet across and from six inches to six feet or more in depth, in
which rain water collects and in which fishes disport themselves.

Each of the areas has a motion of its own from the center to
the edge, due to the gas which is being evolved. If a stake is placed
in the center of one of these areas it will gradually work to the edge

198

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

and disappear This deposit has been called a lake, and it

possesses the qualifications which such a name would imply. It occu-
pies limits well defined by shores. From borings made it appears
that the deposit occupies a bowl-shaped basin, the bottom of which
ioo feet from the shore is 90 feet from the surface. The depth in
the center is unknown as it was impossible with the implements
employed to bore to a depth greater than 135 feet, through all of
which the material was similar to that of the surface. When asphalt
is dug from any portion of the deposit, in the course of a few days
the hole is filled by new material coming from below, but the entire
area of the lake (114 acres) is lowered in consequence, showing that
the mass acts as a liquid, of less mobility, however, than water. The
composition of the asphalt is of remarkable uniformity, no matter

from which portion of the lake it is taken This motion is due

to gas which is constantly being given off and in some places in such

quantities that it can be ignited by a match The lake is fed by

springs bringing in new material From the borings, however,

it is evident that for several generations to come there will be no

shortage The asphalt is dug by picks and mattocks just before

dawn, when the asphalt is comparatively brittle.

According to Charles N. Forrest, Consulting Chemical Engi-
neer, the Barber Asphalt Corporation, borings were made at the cen-
ter of Trinidad Lake about twenty-five years subsequent to Mr.
Henry’s report and this probe revealed a depth of 285 feet with bot-
tom indicated

(Ed. Note — Mr. Henry’s report was made forty-six years ago
and it is now significant to state that the lake is practically as prolific
as ever, despite the fact that it is estimated that more than twelve
million tons have been extracted therefrom since operations began
in the ’seventies. With the bottom thus ascertained it may be fair to
presume that the great influx of bitumen which continues to replen-
ish the Pitch Lake may come from a subterranean pool which enters
the bottom of the Pitch Lake transversely. It is significant to note
that the enormous oil production of Venezuela is not a very great
distance from Trinidad and it may be indicated by this proximity
that the oil which basically supplies Trinidad Lake has a relation to
the Venezuelan source.)

In 1870, Professor E. J. De Smedt, a Belgian chemist, laid the
first asphalt pavement in the United States, employing Trinidad
Lake asphalt. This historic occurrence was in front of the old City
Hall in Newark, New Jersey, a short experimental stretch of
pavement.

199

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

Crude Trinidad asphalt contains 40 per cent, bitumen (asphalt),
27 per cent, mineral matter and about 33 per cent, gas and water. In
the refining process the water and gas are evaporated. The refined
material is 56 per cent, pure asphalt and the balance of the composi-
tion 44 per cent, in organic or mineral matter. The latter is as much a
fixed constituent of Trinidad asphalt as the asphalt itself is. It is not
accidental or adventitious. The impurity of Trinidad asphalt in its
refined state causes it to be too stiff for most purposes, therefore a
softening agent was introduced to render it workable. This was in
the form of paraffine residuum, the residue of refining paraffine base
petroleum. Subsequently an asphaltic base oil was used for this pur-
pose, and these were termed as fluxes.

In 1876, a Board of Engineers from the U. S. Army was appointed
by President Grant to investigate and report on the best type of pave-
ment for reclaiming Pennsylvania Avenue in the Nation’s Capital from
dust and mud. The “Avenue,” as Washingtonians are wont to call
this famous boulevard, has a place in the history of America. The
Capitol Building on an eminence stands majestically in clear view.
The White House is located on the “Avenue” and so are most of the
important public buildings of that beautiful city which has no proto-
type anywhere. The Army Board of Engineers recommended sheet
asphalt to be constructed with Trinidad Lake asphalt. Sheet asphalt
is composed of finely graded sand and mineral filler with asphalt coat-
ing each grain of sand and bit of filler. The asphalt binds or glues
the particles together. Asphalt is only ten per cent, of the mass. In
asphaltic concrete pavement, where stone is used in conjunction with
sand, the amount of asphalt employed in the mixture is less than in
sheet asphalt.

Amzi L. Barber — To Washington from Ohio had come a young
man, one Amzi Lorenzo Barber, who had started his career as a
school teacher. In Washington, Barber, while engaged in real estate
development, bobbed up with a franchise to take asphalt from the
Pitch Lake of Trinidad. He secured an award to pave a portion
of Pennsylvania Avenue while Major Henry L. Cranford was
awarded a contract to pave another sector of that street. Seven years
later The Barber Asphalt Paving Company was organized. Aside
from the Pacific Coast the cities of the country became Trinidad Lake

200

CALIFORNIA— YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

conscious. The demand for those pavements spread to the Rocky
Mountains, to the Gulf, and to Canada on the north with Washing-
ton as the key point. As business grew rapidly Barber moved head-
quarters to New York City, taking with him Captain Francis Vinton
Greene, who resigned from the Corps of Engineers, U. S. Army, and
who had been detailed as Assistant Engineer Commissioner of the
District of Columbia in charge of street paving. Ultimately Greene
became president of the Barber Company. He was colonel of the
71st New York State National Guard Regiment, and in the Spanish-
American War, as brigadier-general of volunteers, he served with
distinction in the land battle which precipitated the fall of Manila.
After retiring from the asphalt industry General Greene was appointed
police commissioner of New York by Mayor Seth Low. To New
York with Barber and Greene came Joseph C. Rock from Washing-
ton, whose promotional achievements contributed to the Barber Com-
pany’s expansion.

After Washington the Barber-Trinidad advance included New
York, Brooklyn, Boston, Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester, Utica, Mon-
treal, Toronto, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Scranton, Chicago, Detroit,
Cleveland, Toledo, St. Louis, Kansas City, Omaha, Denver, Min-
neapolis, St. Paul, Louisville, New Orleans, and scores of other
places fell into line, adopting Trinidad Lake asphalt as a means
of street improvement. Barber was a pioneer in the improve-
ment of American cities, not only creating and augmenting values but
imparted to those municipalities an aesthetic feature that had a worth.
He gave a concession to the Warren Scharf Asphalt Paving Company
to lay Trinidad Lake in cities where the Barber Company generally
did not compete. Here and there local concessionaires paved with
Trinidad Lake, notably the Cranford family, one branch in Wash-
ington and the other in Brooklyn. Doctor Ludwig S. Filbert, a very
prominent Philadelphian of that era, operated there with Trinidad
Lake under the name of the Vulcanite Paving Company. Competi-
tion began to manifest itself. Reports had it that Barber was earn-
ing millions, evidenced by the ownership of a large steam yacht and
the maintenance of a palatial mansion in Washington with several
villas elsewhere. Adjacent to Trinidad Lake there were deposits of
asphalt known as Land Asphalt, supposedly an overflow from the
Pitch Lake which had lain there and weathered for ages. It was

201

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

more impure than lake asphalt and experts thought less of it. Con-
tractors rivalling Barber and his concessionaires sought to, and did,
use land in competition with lake asphalt. Many were the court bat-
tles through injunction suits, recriminatory and bitter hearings before
public bodies and widespread publicity increased with the march of
Barber and Trinidad Lake.

Bermudez Lake Asphalt — About 1891-92, Barber struck a
real snag in his course by the introduction of this new asphalt from
Venezuela, located up the Orinoco River about one hundred miles
by air line from Trinidad. Bermudez, though termed a lake, wras
not really so like Trinidad. It was actually a pitchy swamp with
exudations at irregular places. In Clifford Richardson’s “The Mod-
ern Asphalt Pavement” (1905-08) there is stated:

It is readily seen that this deposit is a very different one from that
in the pitch lake of Trinidad. It seems to be in fact merely an over-
flow of soft pitch from several springs over this large expanse of
savanna and one which has not the depth nor uniformity of that at

Trinidad The percentage of bitumen in the refined material

. . . . will usually average 95 per cent.

Barber overcame this opposition by the most certain way of dis-
posing of a competitor. He acquired the Bermudez interests in the
name of the New York and Bermudez Company, with many operat-
ing subsidiaries. They were then directed by Barber policies, so that
Trinidad and Bermudez were all of one family.

The “Asphalt Trust” — As prosperity grew apace further com-
petition began to spring up that made inroads on the profits of the
Barber Company and affiliated concerns. This arose from the Alca-
traz Asphalt Company of California sponsored by a wealthy banker
of San Francisco, William H. Crocker. Alcatraz asphalt was a hard
native asphalt, mined in Santa Barbara County. Subsidiaries or
licensees of Alcatraz permeated the East and Middle West to plague
the Barber group. This competition became so serious that it was
deemed advisable to merge all asphalt contenders. That is, all but
one. This one factor not in the first merger was a group of paving
companies, plus a prospective asphalt deposit in Mexico, gotten
together by John M. Mack, of Philadelphia. Mr. Mack had made
a fortune in contracting and at this time ( 1900) was very active politi-

202

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

cally in the City of Brotherly Love. The first merger was impres-
sively named The Asphalt Company of America. Mr. Mack’s was
The National Asphalt Company. The two then joined and used the
name of the National Asphalt Company. The press sought to label
this as a trust but it developed that a monopoly in asphalt was out of
the question. The capital stock represented by these mergers was
soon proven to be excessive and unwieldy, so that a reorganization
was effected under the name of the General Asphalt Company, with
the Barber Asphalt Paving Company as the chief operating subsidiary.

Warner Quinlan-La Felicidad — Warner Quinlan Company
originating in Syracuse, operated in numerous cities of the Middle
Atlantic States, using Trinidad land asphalt. For a new supply of
asphalt they were attracted to Venezuela in the neighborhood of the
so-called Bermudez Lake. Adjacent to Bermudez the Warner Quin-
lan people secured a claim named La Felicidad. The New York and
Bermudez Company protested that the Warner Quinlan operatives
were encroaching on Bermudez in taking out asphalt. Trouble ensued
for a time and what portended a serious difficulty proved to be a
“tempest in a teapot.” Subsequent to the La Felicidad squabble, one
General Matos led an insurrection against General Cipriano Castro,
then President-Dictator of Venezuela. Castro was a spectacular fire-
brand who in a lesser domain was as much a totalitarian dictator as
those now current in some of the great European countries. He put
down Matos and his insurrectos.

Bermudez — An International Issue — Following the Matos
revolt, Castro was imbued with the idea that the New York and Ber-
mudez Company (General Asphalt) had aided Matos by financing
him in the futile effort to overthrow the Castro regime. As a reprisal,
Castro confiscated the Bermudez Lake and placed a receiver in charge
to operate the property. The receiver, Carner by name, had formerly
been manager of the New York and Bermudez Company. Mean-
while Barber, who had retired from the asphalt merger after the reor-
ganization, centered his view on Mexico in quest of new asphalt
deposits, organizing the Pan-American Development Company for
that purpose. But now Carner effected an arrangement with Barber
whereby the latter was to assume control of importing, refining and
marketing Bermudez in this country and Canada. The A. L. Barber

203

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

Asphalt Company was then formed to carry out that program. 1904
was the time and for five succeeding years there was precipitated an
international imbroglio which at intervals threatened to rupture dip-
lomatic relations between this country and Venezuela. The Bermudez
owners did not acquiesce without putting forth an intense struggle to
regain their property. They made protests to the State Department
under the administrations of Secretaries John Hay and Elihu Root.
Appeal was also made to the high court of Venezuela. The press
afforded this affair widespread publicity; charges and counter-
charges were hurled to and fro by the participants to this dispute that
was memorable. Castro, meanwhile, “stood pat,” permitting the
A. L. Barber Company to take Bermudez asphalt and sell it. The
other crowd were unremitting in their fight to recover what they con-
sidered was rightfully theirs. General Avery D. Andrews, one time
colleague of Theodore Roosevelt on the New York Police Board,
when New York consisted only of Manhattan Island, and later on the
staff of General Pershing in France, was during the Venezuelan rift
an important executive of the General Asphalt Company. Mr. Dan-
iel T. Pierce, now assistant to the chairman of the Consolidated Oil
Company, was then an executive assistant of the General Asphalt
Company. Both of these gentlemen took a leading part in the endeavor
to restore Bermudez to their company, which was effected after Gomez
succeeded Castro as President of Venezuela.

The restoral of Bermudez transpired in 1909. Mr. Barber passed
away the same year, leaving a heritage in a name that will be long
coupled with asphalt. The Barber Asphalt Corporation is the title
under which the older company now carry on their enterprise. They
market Trinidad Lake, Gilsonite (a pure bitumen mined in Utah) , and
asphaltic petroleum from their Venezuelan concessions not far from
Bermudez Lake. Oil was discovered in Trinidad and from there they
also have shipments. Bermudez went on to make a fine record in the
road building program which was germinating concurrent with the
Bermudez restoration. But eventually its high cost of production,
with the difficulty of getting it out, rendered this history-making
asphalt inert as a factor in the market.

The Ascendancy of Oil Asphalt — Prior to the advent of the
twentieth century there was little known regarding oil asphalt. Early
oil production emanating from Pennsylvania was in the nature of

204

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

paraffine base petroleum. That is, the lighter oils of that region
carried a substantial content of paraffine and upon distillation were
evaporated and recovered through the refining process, leaving a resi-
due of paraffine and wax. As oil fields developed in the West and to
the Southward it was evidenced in newly found production that the
residue of such oils was asphaltic. These were termed asphaltic base
oils. Other fields showed a combination of asphalt and paraffine, such
oils were termed semi-asphaltic crudes. California, with a previous
record of hard or native asphalt that was marketed under such brand
names as Alcatraz, Obispo, Ventura, etc., emerged as a producer of
oil asphalt. Note has been previously made of the mastodon stuck in
a pool of asphalt, which occurred at La Brea, almost in the heart of
the city of Los Angeles. The exudation of asphaltic oil at this spot
is still visible and the city has enclosed the area about this spot and
made it a park. Nothing else could be done with this surface, as the
pool of heavy asphaltic oil thereunder rendered the place unsuitable
for erecting any kind of a building in that immediate section.

In 1901, George Copp Warren,* formerly of the Warren Scharf
Asphalt Paving Company and later to become head of the Warren
Brothers Company of Boston (the world’s largest paving concern),
introduced California oil asphalt to the East. Mr. Warren laid a
pavement with this in Utica, New York, under the brand name of
Acme. Other companies had started to pave with oil asphalt in Cali-
fornia and producers now sought to find a market for this asphalt in
the East and Middle West.

Texas soon manifested a bid for recognition of oil asphalt, the
Lone Star serving as a symbol for a large producer from that historic
State. Oklahoma, Kansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana
and Wyoming joined the procession. Much of the asphaltic oil from
these states is used for spraying the surface of roads, but in some cases
scientific advancement in modern refining has yielded from these crude
oils asphalt that is successfully employed to construct the higher types
of pavements. At the outset asphalt directly derived from oil had an
up-hill battle to gain the confidence of the engineering fraternity.
There was some merit to this opposition, because early production was
not uniform; it caused a feeling of undependability. But along about

*“The Part of the Warrens in the Development of Coal Tar, Petroleum and
Asphalt.”

205

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

1908 stupendous production of very heavy asphaltic oil developed in
the famous Midway field of Kern County, not so far from Bakersfield.
This heavy oil is often referred to as Maltha. The word is defined
by Webster as “viscid and tenacious, like pitch.” With this new heavy
oil and further advancement in refining processes, California asphalt
made progress. In that era, nearing the end of the first decade of
the century, sensational development of asphaltic petroleum fields was
the order. After California and Texas came the great incursion of
Mexican oil. This maltha in crude form was so much like real asphalt
that some claimants averred that it was the only genuine natural
asphalt, because asphalt predominated in the mass, while the light
oils quickly volatilized when the crude was exposed to open air.

With the great Mexican discoveries it is apropos to cite another
incident relating to the intrepid Amzi L. Barber, who more than any
individual looms up in asphalt history. Barber abandoned Mexican
prospects for the lure of a ready marketable material in Bermudez
asphalt. Departing from Mexican operations, he disposed of his
holdings to Edwin L. Doheny for $175,000. On this property there
was developed by Doheny the famous Juan Casiano well, which ranks
with the most ebullient gushers of all time. An intimate associate
of Barber estimated that he passed up approximately ten million
dollars in foregoing Mexico. Ironical in Barber’s fate is that a
group of his former adherents promoted and developed a company
that was among the first to market asphalt from Mexican oil; the
brand name was Aztec. This group, by unusual sagacity, earned a
huge fortune in operating tank steamers. Further ironically, it trans-
pired that through many unfortunate investments Barber’s fortune
was so badly depleted that his estate showed little or nothing. One
of his enterprises was the Locomobile automobile, which he financed
and developed, only to lose the investment in the end.

The enormous production of Mexican oil commenced shortly
after the launching of America’s vast road building program. It was
then that oil asphalt finally came into its own. California, with its
excellent product, was dominant on the Pacific Coast and had spread
through the East and Middle West, but it remained for the product
from the land of the Aztecs to give oil asphalt the impetus that
brought it highly merited recognition. Oil has been the undercurrent
of most of the contention arising between this country and Mexico

206

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

for twenty-five years. From Mexico poured forth hundreds of mil-
lions of barrels of Black Gold. (Oil in bulk is arbitrarily figured at
forty-two gallons to the barrel.) The high quality of the asphalt
derived from Mexican oil was epochal in the industry. Following
Mexico in production came a new colossus in petroleum — Venezuela,
the country which produced Bermudez asphalt. Venezuelan produc-
tion far outstripped the volume of Mexico’s most prolific era in oil.
Asphalt experts concede that asphalt from Venezuelan crude paral-
lels that from the Mexican source. Currently the greatest imports
of asphaltic oil are from Venezuela. Colombia is now sending up
asphaltic oil to further the supply of asphalt. Important develop-
ments in augmenting the supply have been in Arkansas and a new
field in Texas which has occurred in recent years.

Oil is so bound up with nearly all civilized processes and progress
that it is inconceivable to ponder what might happen if we were
deprived of it. Once it comes from the ground there is no refertili-
zation, such as crops have. Asphalt, to a very great extent, is inter-
woven with oil. For example, it is estimated that seventy per cent,
of the world’s petroleum supply has an asphaltic base. From the
derivatives of asphaltic base oil one can build and maintain highways,
roof buildings, even build a certain type of structure, waterproof, pro-
pel an automobile, a railroad train, boat (whether a launch, the
“Queen Mary,” or a battleship) ; operate factories, foundries, mills
and mines; heat buildings; insulate; lubricate; stabilize soil; protect
rivers and harbors; stimulate agriculture cultivation in some cases;
preserve metal; compound rubber; and perform sundry other func-
tions. With a recital of those qualities just enumerated, it is evident
that science has evolved extraordinary results from this effluence of
nature.

Statistics on the consumption of oil asphalt record twenty thou-
sand tons for 1902. In 1938 the total exceeds five million five hun-
dred thousand tons that were used in multiform applications — figures
that are distinctly impressive. While America took the initiative and
continues far in the lead, foreign countries, too, are large consumers
of asphalt. Europe, Asia, Africa, Mexico, Cuba and various coun-
tries of the West Indies, Central America, South America, Australia,
Hawaii, the Philippines and Canada contribute their quotas in
demanding this product of many services. Cuba produces a hard

207

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

asphalt and asphalt is found in many countries, but such asphalts are
seldom exploited.

Much of interest that has followed the ramifications of asphalt
developments of modern trend may be expatiated upon, such as the
records of 1934-35-36-37, which reveal that 83 per cent, of all state
highways constructed in those years were asphaltic in type. Side-
walks to accommodate and make safe the way for pedestrians in
rural sections are now being built with asphalt parallel to the high-
ways. In landing a plane on an airport which is surfaced with asphalt
there is a concord of resiliency when tires of the plane’s wheels meet
the asphalt. Asphalt, primarily a ductile material, imparts flexibil-
ity; therefore it naturally follows that most airports are surfaced
with asphalt in one form or another.

Farm to Market Road — “Lifting the Farmer Out of the Mud,”
is the caption of an article published in 1932 under the authorship of
the Honorable Gifford Pinchot when he was Governor of Pennsyl-
vania. Quotation is here made therefrom:

Road building in America has passed into a new stage. Arterial
highways, which heretofore have been our chief concern, are to
yield their position of first importance, and secondary roads, farm-
to-market roads, are to replace them as a major engineering under-
taking of the Nation.

Here in America in a decade and a half we ran our road bill to
a billion and a half dollars a year. We thought we had settled into
our stride. We thought we knew what we wanted in roads and how
to get it. We concluded we must have an unbroken slab of pave-
ment that would endure to the end of time. Such was our standard
and we would live up to it.

But there was a certain exasperating ant in the molasses. These
roads were back-breakingly expensive. In Pennsylvania they cost
us $50,000 to $70,000 a mile. We spent as much as $85,000,000 a
year to build them. Even where resources shamed Croesus there
was a physical limit to the mileage that could be built on this basis.
And while we got certain arterial highways people in the country
stayed in the mud.

Several states decided the time was ripe to get roads to areas
where traffic did not call for a boulevard that cost $60,000 a mile.
Foremost were Pennsylvania, Virginia and North Carolina. Penn-
sylvania decided to develop the possibilities of so modest a sum as
$6,000 a mile, or even less.

208

LACKAWANNA TRAIL, PENNSYLVANIA

Asphalt Road on Former Railway Right of Way. Tunkhannock Viaduct of D., L. & W.
R. R. in Background

FARM-TO-MARKET ROAD— ASPHALTIC TYPE

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

Sam H. Thompson, formerly president of the American Farm
Federation, is here quoted on the subject, “The Economics of Farm
to Market Roads” :

The American Farm Bureau Federation, devoting its energies
to improving and facilitating the conditions for the economic and
efficient production, conservation, marketing, transportation and dis-
tribution of farm products, must take cognizance of the fact that out
of the 6,250,000 farms in the United States, 2,747,732 are located
on unimproved dirt roads, roads that are impassable certain sea-
sons of the year, roads that act as barriers between the farm and
the marketplace for the produce of that farm. Another group,
1,988,704, are on dirt roads that have some improvements, grad-
ing and draining, roads that are more useful but still are unusable
certain seasons of the year. Less than 500,000 farms in the United
States are located on assured all-year roads.

This lack of adequate year-around farm-to-market roads is cost-
ing agriculture heavily. The mud tax in wear and tear on farm
transportation equipment is enormous. Seasonal market gluts are,
in part, due to the fact that the farmer is forced to move his produce
to market during the period of a few weeks’ time when his dirt roads
are dry and hard. Lack of adequate roads prevents proper rural
fire protection, adds cost to rural medical service, bars proper devel-
opment of the rural school systems. The lack of year-around roads
prevents the proper motorization of the farm transport, keeps the
business of local merchants in rural America stagnant during the
months of mud.

For these reasons, the American Farm Bureau Federation is
engaged in an earnest effort to secure the development of an ade-
quate rural farm-to-market road system in every state in the Union.

“Future Roads and Federal Legislation” is the title of an
article recently published from the pen of the Honorable Wilburn
Cartwright, Chairman, Committee on Roads, United States House
of Representatives. Quotation therefrom :

The Hayden Cartwright Act of 1936 made $125,000,000 authori-
zation for primary roads for each of the fiscal years 1938 and 1939
and provided $25,000,000 for each year to be spent on secondary,
farm to market, rural free delivery and school bus roads.

E. F. Kelley, Chief, Division of Tests, U. S. Bureau of Public
Roads, presented a paper before the eleventh National Asphalt Con-
ference at Memphis, Tennessee, December 7, 1937. Quotation there-
from :

209

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

“Every variety of liquid asphalt has been used in soil stabilization
and, by careful control of moisture content and preliminary pul-
verization, it appears that under favorable conditions all varieties
may achieve good results.

“Stabilization of road bases is without doubt the most important
development of recent years in the field of low-cost road construc-
tion. This development makes it possible for us to visualize the
improvement, at reasonable expense, of thousands of miles of sec-
ondary roads that otherwise could not be reached with the construc-
tion funds that are available. For this we are indebted to the
research workers whose painstaking observations in the field and the
laboratory have given us our present knowledge of the fundamental
principles.”

Past history has occupied much of the foregoing of this narrative,
but this important theme, “Farm-to-Market Road,” concerns itself
with history in the making. Regarding asphalt in this connection, it
is playing a stellar role. Asphalt has been a tremendous factor in
the rapid development of more than 100,000 miles of the farm-to-
market scheme of highway development, providing the farmer with
an all-weather, dustless, mudless road at low cost.

Charles M. Upham, who for many years has served as Engineer-
Director of the American Road Builders Association, was a pioneer
in research anent low cost roads. A quarter of a century since, Mr.
Upham was chief engineer of the du Pont Testing Laboratory, Wil-
mington, Delaware. This undertaking was sponsored by the late
United States Senator, Coleman du Pont. General du Pont was keen
to develop a low cost road that would enable the farmer to reach his
market with a modicum of travel effort. The research of the du
Pont Testing Laboratory under Mr. Upham’s direction has ulti-
mately borne fruit.

“The Farm-to-Market Road” has been the subject of intensive
research and study by the U. S. Bureau of Public Roads, under
Thomas IT. MacDonald, chief of the bureau.

Patented Pavements — The asphalt industry has been prolific
of patents. Not only pavements and surface treatment methods have
intrigued the interest of inventors, but machinery and various devices
pertaining to asphalt in every form have been patented. In the
wake of these patents there has been much litigation pertaining

210

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

thereto. One of the first cases was when General W. W. Averill
brought suit against A. L. Barber over early asphalt pavements.
Professor De Smedt, the Belgian chemist who supervised the laying
of a small stretch of the first sheet asphalt pavement in the United
States, invented “binder,” which is the intermediate course of a sheet
asphalt pavement. Prior to the use of binder the intermediate course
consisted of a “cushion coat,” which was similar to the top course
excepting that the sand was not so carefully graded as in the top or
surface layer.

The outstanding example in patented pavements was furnished
by the Warren Brothers. Through their Bitulithic and Warrenite
pavements, both made with asphalt, they developed a far-flung pav-
ing organization which more or less encircled the globe. The great-
est accomplishment embodying one single contract for pavements in
all history was the paving of the Cuban National Highway with
Warrenite. This job was approximately 700 miles in length, extend-
ing from Havana to the city of Santiago (the latter a shrine to
Americans — the most important battles of the Spanish-American
War, both military and naval, having occurred there.) The cost of
this enormous undertaking was in the neighborhood of one hundred
million dollars. The Warren family has occupied a very high and
important position in the development of the asphalt industry, and
the progenitors of the present brothers Warren were pioneers in the
field of bituminous materials in applications to service. During the
affluent days of Barber and his asphalt company many members of
the Warren family were associated with the Barber interests directly,
and indirectly through the Warren Scharf Asphalt Paving Company.
No chronicle of asphalt development would be complete without this
distinguished family of old New England stock.

“Amiesite,” patented by the late Doctor Joseph Hays Amies, of
Philadelphia, was epochal in asphalt paving construction in that it
was a cold mixed pavement. Hitherto all asphalt paving, and asphalt
usage in general, had been done through the application of heat.
Cold mixed pavements and cold methods of applying liquid asphalt
have made giant strides since Amies led the way thirty years ago.

“Macasphalt,” named for William P. McDonald, one of the
largest operators now active in paving work, has an unusual distinc-
tion beyond being extensively laid on streets and roads. This was

21 1

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

in the construction of the Madison Square Bowl in Long Island City,
a very unique form of asphalt construction, where many champions
of the prize ring have been dethroned. McDonald has paved the
thoroughfares of the New York World’s Fair grounds with asphalt,
involving more than one million square yards; in length exceeding
twenty miles. John E. Consalus, a veteran in asphalt construction,
had the work of placing asphalt in the flooring of the various build-
ings comprising this gargantuan exhibition. The engineering of this
extensive paving work was under supervision of Colonel Henry
Welles Durham, who has been associated with important engineer-
ing projects in this country and abroad for over a quarter of a century.

“Colprovia,” an imported idea from England, has made fine
progress in this country. Colprovia indicates cold processed way.

Emulsified Asphalt — In line with patents and the theme of
cold asphaltic application, emulsification of asphalt for varying degrees
of use, not only for road and street construction and maintenance,
but for various forms of commercial employment, has been another
important development in the industry. This method permits the
handling of material cold, eliminating the necessity of heating, thereby
saving much trouble and effecting a consequent reduction of cost.
Emulsified is in general use over a widespread area of this country.
It is shipped, stored and applied at normal temperatures. A special
treatment in the production of this class of material is employed
when contemplated for winter use. Van Westrum, a Hollander, had
much to do with the early development of emulsified asphalt and
secured patents. Another form came via England and this has been
vigorously developed by an international petroleum corporation.
W. T. Headley, of Philadelphia, was long a prominent figure in this
particular field before his demise. Lester Kirschbraun, formerly of
Chicago, has been a factor in the art.

Asphalt Blocks — This type of pavement has a long record in
pavement history. Not long after Barber started the promotion of
sheet asphalt in the late ’seventies, asphalt blocks came into being.
Typical uses are — streets (especially those on hillsides), roads,
bridges and viaducts; driveways, plazas and courtyards; airport
aprons and hangars; piers, industrial floorings, platforms and roof

212

SUBURBAN RESIDENCE

Asphalt Blocks on Drive and Asphalt Shingles on Roof of Dwelling

CHICAGO AIRPORT— ASPHALT RUNWAYS

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

decks. Asphalt tile (hexagonal in design) for walks, corridors,
school and playgrounds ; swimming pools and terraces.

The original development of asphalt block and tile was due to
Walter S. Wilkinson, a courtly Virginia gentleman of rare charm
and gracious wit. Mr. Wilkinson was identified with the early exploi-
tation of Trinidad Lake and played a very active part in launching
Mexican asphalt in this country after the great effulgence of oil pro-
duction in Mexico had manifested itself in the years 1910-11. His
contributions to patented features of asphaltic science were worthy.
George Baxter Upham and Edwin J. Morrison were vital figures in
the subsequent development of asphalt block history.

Asphalt Planks — Are a comparatively recent development,
being used for the flooring of bridges, factories, culverts, etc. This
type of construction has gained much favor and is produced by manu-
facturers of asphalt roofing and allied products.

Hunt Process — This is an impervious membrane produced from
asphalt for the “setting” of concrete highways after the construction
of such highways has been completed. By the “Hunt Process” this
asphalt membrane is spread over the concrete by mechanical appli-
ances. This process and others of like character are a marked advance
over old methods when burlap, hay, straw and/or water were
employed to cover the concrete.

Municipal Asphalt Paving Plants — By 1903 cities had
acquired a tremendous yardage of asphalt, more than one hundred
million square yards, tremendous for those days, but relatively insig-
nificant now. After more than two decades of service, heavy trav-
elled streets showed the necessity of replacement or resurfacing. The
lesser travelled ones could be maintained for a much longer period
with a repair here and there. A “stitch in time” is an advisable prac-
tice with sheet asphalt; it will often save “nine.” And this is no
exception to the general rule. In resurfacing the old foundation may
be continued in service provided that it was originally adequate —
this accentuates one of the economical advantages of this type of
paving. Agitation for municipally-operated asphalt paving plants
had taken root. Detroit, always to the fore as a progressive city,
established the initial plant in 1903. This was concurrent with

213

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

another epoch, for at that time Henry Ford started his automobile
factory in Detroit (Highland Park). Detroit imported an asphalt
expert from Washington, District of Columbia, Clarence A. Proctor,
to inaugurate and supervise plant operations. Proctor had been
trained by Allan W. Dow, then inspector of asphalts and cements
for the District of Columbia, now the dean of the world’s asphalt
technologists and after fifty years of service continuing very actively.
At first the Detroit plant was a modest affair, but now they have two
giant plants widely separated as to location, effectively catering to
the needs of a city that has for growth and industrial development
been one of the wonders of the age. After thirty-six years of inten-
sive service, Mr. Proctor, like his mentor, Mr. Dow, carries on.

The example of Detroit’s municipal plant was soon patterned
by other cities, with few important exceptions. The ensuing decade
saw the establishment of such plants not only here but in Canada —
Montreal, Toronto and Winnipeg being the leaders there. It may
be mentioned incidentally that Canada went in quite extensively for
asphalt paving improvements and that the Provincial authorities fol-
lowed the lead of the cities by using asphalt on rural highways. In
Montreal there is a large refinery which produces asphalt from petro-
leum and there are several or more plants in the Dominion which
manufacture roofing with asphalt.

Roofing-Waterproofing-Insulation, Et Cetera — In the
manufacture of roofing, asphalt is widely used as a saturant and as a
binding or cementing agent, with many diversifications in the art.
The Asphalt Shingle and Roofing Institute, under the direction of
Jack S. Bryant, has disseminated widespread knowledge on this very
important essential of man’s existence, “putting a roof over his head.”
It may be asserted that two-thirds of America’s roofing requirements
consist of asphalt fabricated materials. Foreign countries as well are
large consumers of this product. The production of asphalt roofing
has increased by leaps and bounds since the Spanish- American War.
Bituminous roofings have a long record and again the Warren fam-
ily enters the picture because this illustrious group had some of their
forebears identified with the primal movement of this phase of hous-
ing nearly a century ago. Now many great concerns are nationally
known for their manufacture of asphalt roofing and allied products.

214

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

An old and widely used form is termed “built-up” roofing, consisting
of a plurality of layers of asphalt impregnated felt. Prepared roof-
ings of woven fabrics and asphalt are made in variations of design.

Asphalt shingles have enjoyed a phenomenal rise in popularity
for more than twenty years. Variations of this type are many, both
as to design and application. They are attractively colored and pre-
sent a very pleasing appearance. Asphalt sidings are used to supplant
clapboards in wooden buildings. Floor coverings of asphaltic com-
position are substituted for linoleum and are diversified in design of
prints. Asphalt fabricated boards are used for sheathings, partitions
and ceilings. In fact, it is feasible to construct a certain type of dwell-
ing entirely with asphalt fabricated material and then complete the
job by insulating it with asphalt impregnated paper. Insulation of
wires, fiber conduits, blasting fuses, refrigerators, automobile brake
linings, clutch facings and tops is effected. Asphalt is used in plas-
tics, the paint and varnish trade, cords and ropes, acoustical blocks,
and even has gone to the aid of agriculture. In Hawaii the pineapple
crop has been aided by using asphalt saturated paper around the plants.
It is said that this method increases the yield by from twenty-five to
fifty per cent. For the protection of valuable merchandise against
dampness, wrapping paper as well as cartons and boxes of paper are
treated with an impregnation of asphalt.

The coating and preservation of pipe was a very difficult problem
to solve and in the solution of this problem asphalt once again ren-
dered a distinct service. Oil companies with long pipe lines have used
asphalt effectively, especially where the pipe is laid in a salt marsh
sector. In Iraq, where the pipe line is about one thousand miles in
length, asphalt was used to protect this lengthy conveyor of oil. Vats
where chemicals are held in solution and tanks where metals are in a
process of refinement have their sides and floors coated with asphalt
as a protectant. Asphalt is used by the rubber industry for several
purposes in the compounding of rubber goods, especially in producing
tires. Pre-moulded expansion joints composed of asphalt and fabric
are manufactured by some roofing manufacturers. These expansion
joints are widely used in concrete road construction.

Moderns have followed the precept of the ancients in using asphalt
for waterproofing. This ancient form of repelling nature’s most pow-
erful element has been scientifically improved by engineers in practice

215

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

with the result that buildings of many descriptions, bridges, subways,
tunnels and viaducts, employ this means to keep water out. Conversely,
pools, reservoirs and tanks are serviced with asphalt to keep water
within.

Revetment Protection — “Ole Man River,” a song emanating
from light opera, bids fair to be an everlasting American folk song.
Its lyrics tell of the strength and ravages of a river that we all know
to be the Mississippi. Another popular song, “River, Stay Away from
My Door,” conveys sentiment and serious import, too. The Federal
Government has for many years expended huge sums endeavoring to
repel the waters of the Mississippi and thereby prevent encroachment
on contiguous lands, as well as to maintain more than a semblance of
regularity in the course of this historic stream. During the incum-
bency of General Lytle Brown as chief engineer, Corps of Engineers,
U. S. Army, it was decided to employ asphalt in the solution of revet-
ment protection. Soil erosion transpires when the waters burrow
through embankments and ultimately change the river’s course, con-
sequently acting as an accelerator of floods that are devastating. In
reference to the undertaking inaugurated under General Brown and
accomplishments as a result thereof, quotations are herewith made
from a paper presented by W. C. Carey, senior engineer, Second New
Orleans District, U. S. Engineer Department, at the meeting of the
Mid-South Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Little
Rock, Arkansas, May 24, 1935 :

As might therefore be expected, the asphalt mattress is the natural
evolutionary outcome of this constant effort toward betterment, accel-
erated perhaps by the results of recent surveys and by developments
incident to attempts to improve other types of mattresses. It must be
emphasized that the problem of successful bank protection under the
extreme conditions prevailing on the lower Mississippi River is not
to be solved by any merely ingenious design of a mattress. Plant and
equipment for fabricating and placing the mattress, as well as methods
to be employed are all inseparable from the question of design of the
mattress It is interesting to turn to the records of ancient civili-

zation in localities where bitumen was available. Thus it is found
that, in ancient Babylon and Assyria, bitumen was extensively used as
a mortar base in masonry and building work and its use as a water-
proofing medium to make durable other less durable construction mate-
rials (in their case poorly burned bricks) was well understood and

216

MISSISSIPPI RIVER REVETMENT

Shows End of First Launch : the Barge Ready for Operations in the Casting of Second
Launch when Mattress will be Pulled into Place on the Bank

MISSISSIPPI RIVER REVETMENT

The Start in Launching Asphalt Mattress Showing Cables and Tackle -Used in Pulling
Initial Launch from the Deck of Casting Barge

ASPHALT — ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

practised by these peoples. Similarly in Assyria in 1300 B. C., is
found the first instance of the use of bitumen in connection with river
bank protection work: At that time King Sanherib, to prevent the
meandering of the Tigris River, revetted its bed with rush mattresses
and constructed a massive sloping training wall, of layer upon layer
of burned bricks, each layer being laid in, and cemented together with

bituminous mastic With the field work of the raw material

survey completed, the next step was to go back into the laboratory
and determine whether a suitable asphaltic mixture could be made
trom the natural low cost materials occurring along the Mississippi
River in unlimited quantities. Work in the laboratory was now
resumed and energetically pushed over a period of several months. In
this work, the services of F. C. Field of the Asphalt Institute were
most valuable The final step in the history of the asphalt mat-

tress, which translated it into the realm of accomplished fact, was the
conclusion of Lieutenant-Colonel John N. Hodges, District Engineer,
Second New Orleans District, in July, 1932, that an asphalt mattress
was economically and otherwise advantageous, and his decision to
inaugurate working scale experiments. So much for history.

Conclusions from Mr. Carey’s paper :

( 1 ) Initially, the asphalt mattress is perhaps actually, certainly
comparatively, stronger than the concrete mattress and better able to
resist the destructive forces to which it is subjected while performing
its work of protecting the river bed.

(2) Permanently; that is after the exposed unprotected launch-
ing cables of the concrete mattress have rusted away, the asphalt mat-
tress is definitely much stronger both actually and comparatively.

Quoting an editorial from the “Engineering News-Record,” of
August 20, 1936:

Successful mending of the Galveston jetties with hot asphaltic
concrete deposited in water, and the planned use of that material in
greater mass and depth of penetration for the Columbia River jetties,
is a notable development in the use of asphalt. As described in this
issue, few accomplishments in asphalt construction have come with
greater surprise. In roofing and paving, the use of hot oils and asphalt
mixtures in the presence of water has for years called for a forbidding
clause in engineering specifications. No incompatibility of engineering
materials and water has been more nearly an accepted creed. Even
when a few years ago the engineers on the lower Mississippi proved
the possibility of molding asphalt sheets and placing them hot for
underwater bank revetment the experience was not considered conclu-

217

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

sive ; the molding of the hot material was still a dry operation although
immersion followed before cooling had set up the bitumen. At Gal-
veston the full step has been taken of depositing the hot material under
water in bulk to settle, take form and bond up under its own weight
aided by vibration. This the mixture used has done with pronounced
success and a new construction method has been added to those avail-
able for underwater work.

The Asphalt Institute — This organization was effected twenty
years ago. Originally named the Asphalt Association, change in title
was made ten years later. It is a non-profit organization, and its aims
and objectives are to further the dissemination of information in the way
of bettering and improving the cause of asphalt by correlating knowl-
edge through the printed word, lectures, film and radio. Through the
services of technologists and by holding individual and mass confer-
ences that make for advancement and expansion of the asphaltic field,
this cause was furthered. Annually the Institute sponsors a National
Asphalt Conference to which delegates come from all parts of the
United States and Canada. Foreign countries are represented at these
conferences, where papers are presented and discussed covering a wide
range of activity in asphalt. The Institute maintains headquarters in
New York City with field offices at Washington, D. C., Cincinnati,
Dallas, and Kansas City. On the Pacific Coast, with headquarters at
San Francisco, there is a cooperating organization. From its incep-
tion the Institute has been under the direction of James Edmund
Pennybacker, managing director. Mr. Pennybacker formerly was
chief economist, United States Bureau of Public Roads, and in that
capacity drew the original bill for Federal aid to road building, which
Congress enacted into law in 1916. Mr. Pennybacker’s fund of knowl-
edge was invaluable to the committees of Congress when this epochal
piece of legislation was pending. The late Logan Waller Page, of
distinguished kin, was then Chief of the United States Bureau of Pub-
lic Roads. Mr. Page was the foremost advocate of Federal Aid and
this great continuing governmental activity is a figurative monument
to his memory.

Prevost Hubbard, noted authority on asphalt, is chemical engi-
neer of the Institute. Mr. Hubbard was formerly chief chemist of
the Bureau of Public Roads and also served with the Institute of
Industrial Research at Washington. Bernard E. Gray, formerly an
engineer with the Bureau of Public Roads, as well with the Massachu-

218

MISSISSIPPI RIVER REVETMENT

Showing Completion of Launching Operation from Deck of Casting Barge. Asphalt Mix-
ing Plant on Barge in Background. For these Launchings Shore Anchorage Has Been
Made : as Barge Recedes from Shore the Mat is Lowered Into Place.

LA BREA PIT PARK, LOS ANGELES
Exudation of Asphalt Where Bones of Pre-historic Animals Were Found

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

setts and West Virginia State Highway Departments, is chief engi-
neer. Walter R. MacAtee is in charge of the Institute’s office at
Washington, D. C. Albert H. Hinkle, D. D. Williamson, and Frank
S. Gilmore are field engineers, being located at Cincinnati, Kansas
City and Dallas, respectively. Daniel B. Miller has charge of San
Francisco headquarters. Ernest M. Bristol is director of public rela-
tions at New York headquarters. The Institute has published and
circulated numerous brochures, papers and specifications pertaining
to asphalt. It has cooperated with the Bureau of Public Roads, Corps
of Engineers, U. S. Army, State highway departments, county road
departments, municipal officials, colleges and private commercial inter-
ests. A laboratory and library feature the headquarters.

Asphalt Technologists — To industry, technologists are indis-
pensable, and industry owes much to the men of technique who by their
research, study and ceaseless endeavors are entitled to laurel wreaths for
their great part in human progress. Allen W. Dow is the senior of all
asphalt technologists. Herbert Abraham, Julius Adler, Gene Abson,
Oscar H. Berger, W. J. Emmons, F. C. Field, Walter H. Flood,
Charles N. Forrest, Henry G. Gundlach, Prevost Hubbard, W. J.
Hempleman, H. M. Hancock, Felix Kleeberg, Lester Kirschbraun,
Le Roy M. Law, Claude L. McKesson, Kenneth McKenzie, J. Strother
Miller, Victor Nicholson, Harold W. Pullar, C. A. Rafael, C. F.
Ramey, T. H. Rogers, Hugh H. Skidmore, Herschel C. Smith, Her-
bert Spencer and Isaac Van Trump are among those who have been
long active in the profession. The late Clifford Richardson, Harvard
classmate of Theodore Roosevelt, was widely known and played an
important part as asphalt developed in use. His treatise, “The Mod-
ern Asphalt Pavement,” was the first work ever published devoted
exclusively to the art. Antedating Richardson in asphalt technology
were Professors Bowen and Peckham.

Colonel James W. Howard, who recently passed away, was a
unique and very interesting personality. He was a son of General
O. O. Howard, during the Civil War a member of General Grant’s
staff and later (about 1890) the highest ranking officer of the U. S.
Army. General Howard, subsequent to Appomattox, was in charge
of the Freedmen’s Bureau in Washington, when ex-slaves rushed to
the National Capital from the South. He created the first seat of
learning for colored youth in the establishment of Howard University

219

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

at Washington, which was named in his honor. The son, Colonel
Howard, was first associated with A. L. Barber in Washington. Later
he operated an independent consulting laboratory in New York and
made this his life work. Colonel Howard frequently was summoned
to give testimony in litigation and in hearings before public bodies.
His laboratory files were probably the most encompassing of all in
matters relating to paving, particularly with reference to asphalt. The
late Francis P. Smith was for many years in association with Mr. Dow
under the firm name of Dow and Smith as paving consultants. He
was a pioneer in the technology of refining asphalt derived directly
from petroleum. After service with California petroleum producers
in this regard, he went to Mexico at the instance of Lord Cowdray,
the noted British oil magnate. At a refinery on the Isthmus of Tehu-
antepec, he instructed Cowdray’s men in the art of refining asphalt
from heavy Mexican oil. Truly “Frank” Smith had a part in making
asphalt history. In court as a qualified technical witness he scarcely
had an equal. So much so that an attorney on the opposing side, dur-
ing a case in Indiana, said in referring to Smith, “This expert, and
indeed he is an expert.”

The Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists is composed of
those representing the United States Bureau of Public Roads, State
highway departments, county road departments, municipal paving
laboratories, independent testing laboratories, and the technical rep-
resentatives of various commercial enterprises which have a hand in
the production and application of asphalt. The Asphalt Paving Tech-
nologists meet annually at the National Asphalt Conference and take
a leading hand in the proceedings.

Bibliography

In the foregoing pages there was no attempt to treat of asphalt in a technical sense.
For students and those who may desire to delve into a study of this subject, also for con-
struction men who may desire to more fully acquaint themselves in the art, reference may
be made to the following works :

“The Modern Asphalt Pavement” (1905-08), Clifford Richardson.

“Asphalts” (1908), T. Hugh Boorman.

“Dust Preventives and Binders” (1910), Prevost Hubbard.

“Laboratory Manual of Bituminous Materials” (1916), Prevost Hubbard.

“Highway Inspectors’ Hand Book” (1919), Prevost Hubbard.

“American Highway Engineers’ Hand Book” (1919), Prevost Hubbard. (Specifi-
cally referring to Section No. 12.)

“Asphalt Pocket Reference for Highway Engineers” (1937), Prevost Hubbard and
Bernard E. Gray.

“Asphalt and Allied Substances” (1918-20-29-38), Herbert Abraham.

(Note — Mr. Abraham’s work is more comprehensive on the subject than any other.)

The Asphalt Institute during its existence has issued many papers, brochures, and
specifications embodying this subject.

220

ASPHALT— ORIGIN, HISTORY, DEVELOPMENT

Acknowledgment is made to the above sources and to Philip W. Henry, Consulting
Engineer.

Asphalt Producers

Allied Materials Corporation
American Mexican Petroleum Corporation
Anderson-Prichard Oil Corporation
Arro Oil and Refining Company
Ashland Oil and Refining Company
Atlantic Refining Company
Barber Asphalt Corporation
Berry Asphalt Company
Big Horn Oil and Refining Company
Cities Service Oil Company
Casmite Corporation
Colonial Beacon Oil Company
Colorado Midland Refining Company
Cosco Oil Company
Cosden Petroleum Corporation
Exeter Refining Company
Gilmore Oil Company
Gulf Oil Corporation
Hart Refineries
Home Oil Refining Company
Independent Refining Company
Indian Refining Company
Imperial Oil Limited
Lion Oil Refining Company
Magnolia Petroleum Company
M. M. McCallen Refining and Producing
Company

MacMillan Petroleum Corporation
Mexican Petroleum Corporation
Mid-Continent Petroleum Corporation
Paluxy Asphalt Co.

Pan-American Petroleum and Transport
Company

Perry Petroleum Company
Phillips Petroleum Company

The Pioneer Asphalt Company
Richfield Oil Company
River Dome Oil Company
Riverside Oil Co.

Russell Oil Co.

San Fernando Refining Company
Seaside Oil Co.

Skelly Oil Co.

Shell Oil Company
Shell Union Corporation
Shell Petroleum Corporation
Sinclair Refining Company
Sun Oil Company
Sunray Refining Company
Standard Oil Co. of California
Standard Oil Co. of Indiana
Standard Oil Co. of Lousiana
Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey
Standard Oil Co. of New York (Division
of Socony Vacuum)

Standard Oil Company (An Ohio Corpo-
ration)

The Texas Company

Texas Pacific Coal and Oil Co.

Tidewater Associated Oil Co.

Tri State Refining Co.

The Shallow Water Refining Co.

Trumbull Asphalt Co.

Talco Asphalt and Refining Co.

Utah Oil Refining Corporation
Union Oil Company of California
White Eagle Div., Socony Vacuum Oil Co.
Wirt Franklin Petroleum Corp.

Wyoming Oil and Refining Company
Yale Oil Company

Note — A number of the above companies refine asphalt for all purposes while others
confine their operations to liquid asphalt for spraying on roads.

Asphalt Shingle
American Asphalt Roof Corp.

American Tar & Chemical Corp.

Artie Roofings, Inc.

Barber Asphalt Corp.

Barrett Company
Becker Roofing Co.

J. E. Berkheimer Mfg. Co.

Bird & Son, Inc.

Samuel Cabot, Inc.

Philip Carey Company
Celotex Company
Certain-teed Products Corp.

Cooper Company
El Rey Products Co.

Flintkote Company
Ford Roofing Products Co.

Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co.

Globe Roofing Products Co.

Gold Seal Roofing Co.

Roofing Producers
Johns-Manville Sales Corp.

Keystone Roofing Manufacturing Co.
Koppers Co., Tar & Chemical Division
Lehon Company
Logan-Long Company
National Manufacturing Corp.

B. F. Nelson Mfg. Co.

Palmer Asbestos & Rubber Co.

Paraffine Cos., Inc.

Reilly Tar & Chemical Corp.

Roofing Products Co.

Ruberoid Company
Texas Company
Tilo Roofing Co.

United States Gypsum Co.

Weaver- Wall Co.

Western Elaterite Roofing Co.

Williams Roofing Co.

221

Ancestor- Hunting in Lxermany

By First Lieutenant Karl Frederick Steinhauer,1
Signal Corps Reserve, Jacksonville, Florida

UMEROUS articles have been written on the subject of
ancestor-hunting in England. This preference to research
in the British Isles has been very natural and proper, for
the fact that these United States are English-speaking is
proof that a plurality, if not a majority, of our citizenry are of British
descent. The articles have sought to assist other interested families
to find their own genealogical backgrounds, guided by hints and exam-
ples drawn from the writers’ experiences on their recent trips to
Great Britain.

Another substantial group in our population is the folk of Ger-
man descent. The writer has recently returned from a three-month
stay in Germany and adjoining countries, during which his time was
divided between sightseeing and genealogical snooping. In the latter
such marked success was encountered that he feels duty-bound to
inform his genealogy-minded friends of German descent of a golden
opportunity which exists at the present moment for ancestral research
in the Vaterland. Without venturing upon so controversial a ques-
tion as the expediency of Nationals ozialismus in general, it must be
agreed that genealogy has attained far greater heights, has touched
each individual citizen more personally, and has received greater
national attention in the Reich than anywhere else in the world at
any time. The cause, of course, is the Hitler anti-Semitic movement.
An important step in the racial purification of the country is a law
requiring each person on the federal pay-roll to prove that not one of
his ancestors has practiced any Hebrew rite since the year 1800. The
customary proof is for each government employe to submit to his
immediate superior a complete ancestral chart back to 1800, with a
Beglaubigung or certificate from the respective parish rector or pas-
tor (or archivist, in the case of older records) written beside each

1. Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering, Washington University (Saint
Louis) ; member, Sons of the Revolution (Missouri).

222

Stammtmum

©obnort unb 5Bi
©eburtsorf, -tag.

f rO0tbO0tn jur flppenftunDlidipn
6rfa|Tunp auslanDsDcutfdier Familien

lers: - | ®uj>iencfl b« gcfamlbeulften |

SEBobnorl unt
©eburlsort, ■

gragebogen

(oom ©infenber audjufQQen)

9letcf)$ftetle fiir Gtppenforfctyung

Berlin Bit) 7

i^ierburd) petle i<b 91nlrag aqf bie ©rleilung eined Slbpammungdbeftbelbed (
1. 9tame: . (geborene:)

ftonfeffion je$t:

lebig, oetbeiralet, gef<bieben?
■ajlilglieb ber 3l6©21«p.obei

frtflt;

toeitere $Ingaben fiber ©begat!
brer 9iebenorganifationen :

. SDlitgUebdnummer

geffefit, tteil (Ungabe bed Sroetfed unb ber gefe^Iic^en biro, onbei

®ie ©injiebung non ©ebfibren unb AoftenerfifattungdbetrSgen erfolgt field
finb nut auf befonbere SJnforberung einjufenben.

, HUe oerfflgbaren ‘perfonenpanbdurfunben fiber ten 31ngefrag!en unb feine Uorfabren foroi
fraglen ffige itb be*.

Qlnjablungen
2 ‘Bilber bed <21nge-

®et ‘Hbpommungdbeftbeib foil gefanbt t
a) ben QlniragpeKer:

X 105/4/37/30000

THREE TYPES OP GENEALOGICAL QUESTIONNAIRES CURRENT IN PRESENT-DAY
GERMANY

ANCESTOR-HUNTING IN GERMANY

alleged birth and marriage date (often, but not necessarily, beside
each death date too), that rites of baptism and marriage (and burial)
were had in his church (Catholic, Lutheran, Evangelical, etc.) as
evidenced by original entries in the registers of the church. After
scrutiny by the employe’s superiors, this ancestry-identification or
Ahnenpass is returned to the employe, and becomes at once, like his
passport, a valuable personal document, and also, in view of the
time spent in research, a treasured family heirloom.

Racial purity is a requirement for getting onto or staying on the
German federal pay-roll. Even in these United States the federal
employes constitute an appreciable proportion of the population, but
in Germany it is even larger — it is said that one German in eight is
dependent upon a federal salary — for not only are there scarcely
fewer “alphabet-soup” bureaus and agencies in the Nazi administra-
tion, but also certain functions which we regard as local in the U. S.,
such as fire and police, and those two great industries, telephony and
the railroads, which in the U. S. are quasi-private enterprises, in Ger-
many are functions of the federal government.

So we see that genealogical research has become a problem of
genuine seriousness to a substantial part of Germany’s population
. . . . it is not enough for one to know he is of Aryan descent; he
must submit documentary proof of it. Undoubtedly a few have
regarded this as just so much red-tape — a time-wasting “rule” with
which to comply if one wishes to hold his job (human nature is like
that sometimes). Be that as it may, the fact is that upon fulfillment
of the obligation depends their livelihood, and the Germans are busy
complying. Most of them, upon finishing the task, are imbued with
that satisfaction and sense of family pride which many of my readers
have enjoyed from like work .... it was something they had always
had in the backs of their heads to do “some day” (but without a little
governmental prodding they never would have gotten around to it).
Some few become greatly interested and have the personal interest to
carry their genealogies as far back as they can — much beyond the
required 1800 A. D.

Family-science or Sippenkunde is a subject in which every German
is interested. There is no bookstore in Germany which does not sell
some sort of genealogical forms .... it may be a mere folded sheet
or Ahnentafel costing but a few Pfennige, but the corner bookstore

223

ANCESTOR-HUNTING IN GERMANY

or magazine or news stand will have something of the sort for sale.
Even beautifully-bound Ahnenpasse are inexpensive, so great is the
market for their sale. Without abolishing the usual individual cer-
tificates of vital statistics, Reich law provides that, upon request,
churches and city halls must write baptism or birth certificates, etc., in
any approved blank book or Ahnenpass which one may have bought
as his ancestral record. Ahnentafeln are available for 6 ancestors,
and bound Ahnenpasse can be bought with a complete set of sys-
tematically-arranged blank spaces ruled and labeled for the birth,
marriage and death certificates of perhaps 14 or 30 or 62 or even 126
ancestors. They are wonderfully well organized genealogies, a coun-
terpart of which one might hope some day to be able to buy printed in
English.

There are two ways to go about filling up one’s Ahnenpass. Many
of the entries probably can be proven at one’s local city hall or church.
Then one can take his Ahnenpass with him, do his own research, and,
after finding the records of his family, he himself can write the facts
and data into the appropriate certificate spaces, and lay before the
clerk or pastor the Ahnenpass and the several original record books,
opened at the right places, whereupon the clerk or pastor must exe-
cute the certification that each Ahnenpass-e ntry “mit dem Hauptreg-
ister gleichlautend ist” (agrees with the original record) .... in
which case the statutory fee is but Rpf. 10 or 4c per certification. Or,
one can ask the clerk or pastor to write the whole body of the certificate
into the Ahnenpass (a good idea for us Americans not too familiar
with decryptographing the German script in older records) in which
case the statutory fee is Rpf. 60 or 24c per entry (tourists traveling
with Registermark currency can figure this as more nearly only 15c
per entry). But suppose one has a heavy well-bound Ahnenpass,
upon which he does not care to pay postage to the city hall in every
remote town whence some one female ancestor may have come?
Then he may obtain the ordinary birth, marriage, or death certificate
on whatever odd size of paper that city hall may use — the demand
for this service is so great that many city halls, even in small towns
(for example, Rockenhausen, only 2,000 population), have found it
profitable to install photostat machines to save the time of copying —
and the fee for a certificate, or for a certified photostat, is Rpf. 60.
Then one may submit this little certificate, and his Ahnenpass with

224

THE PROTESTANT ARCHIVES BUILDING AT SPEYER AM RHEIN, GERMANY

ANCESTOR-HUNTING IN GERMANY

the essential facts transcribed therein, to his local city hall, which will
execute officially the certification in the Ahnenpass “auf Grund vor-
gelegter TJrkunde” (on the grounds of a certificate laid before us).
The fee for this is only Rpf. io. Erwerbslose or indigents can obtain
a certificate of their plight, which exempts them from the payment of
any of the fees.

Nachweise der arischen Abstammung or proofs of Aryan descent
occupy so much of the time of German city hall clerks that one finds
them very sympathetic, helpful, well-qualified, and willing to aid the
amateur genealogist. The great volume of genealogical business
since 1933 has made it possible for the Standesamter or vital statistics
offices to be very well equipped .... as has been said, a large num-
ber have photostat machines. This is truly a rare opportunity, of
which persons of German descent should take full advantage while
the present Nazi regime makes it possible.

The records available are of two sorts, civil and church. Civil
records of vital statistics seem to have been commenced under the
French rule when Moreau invaded Germany, and are excellent. They
go into considerable detail .... an amusing feature is that the
French law required the father of a new-born child to bring to
the city hall witnesses who had examined the baby, for they had to
swear “le sexe de l’ enfant a ete reconnu etre masculin” (or “feminin” )
— the sex of the child has been recognized to be male (or female, as
the case might be). To a birth record we usually find the father’s
autographic signature (or A mark?!), and on a marriage record we
usually find the autographic signatures of the two parties, and if one
has such records photostated, one has a priceless collection of the
handwritings of his ancestors ! Prior to the Napoleonic invasion, it
seems that the only records were the baptism, marriage, and burial
records of the churches, and the entries in these are usually very brief
(rarely giving the ages of the parties to a marriage, for example),
making it difficult, sometimes, to prove descent and lineage.

A peculiarity of the records during the occupation by Napoleon is
that the dates are usually given in terms of the French Revolutionary
or Republican calendar, under which time dates from September 22,
1792 — le 1 vendemiaire l’ an I, the day the French Republic was
founded, that is, the day following the abolition of the monarchy.2

2. Page 286 in The French Revolution and Napoleon by Leo Gershoy, New York
F. S. Crofts & Co., 1933.

225

ANCESTOR-HUNTING IN GERMANY

In typical revolutionary-atheistic3 fashion, the French sought to blot
out Sunday and the names of the Roman deities memorialized in the
Gregorian calendar, and a io-day week and new month-names descrip-
tive rather than religious, were adopted .... for example, January
became nivose or “the month of snow.” This calendar was in effect
in France from October 5, 1793, through December 31, 1805, and in
western Germany4 from September 22, 1798, through December 31,
1805. Many home encyclopedias attempt to give a single definition
of the span of each French month in terms of dates in the Gregorian
calendar, but this is incorrect, as the equation differs from year to
year, because the French leap-year-day occurred in September, 1795,
1799, and 1803, instead of on February 29, 1796, 1800, and 1804, as
in the Gregorian calendar. Several excellent conversion tables are
obtainable in France5 and in Germany 6 7. If one is so fortunate as to
trace his ancestry into the fifteenth, sixteenth, or early seventeenth
century, one may possibly encounter another change of month-names ;
for example, July becomes Heumonat or the “hay-month.” But there
are several good books on Zeitrechnung 7 or time-reckoning to
straighten one out.

The records may be found in any one of three places: the city
hall Standesamt, a church Pfarramt, or centralized denominational
archives. The Steinhauer (Steinhawer) ancestors of this record, for
example, lived in a little village, spelled in olden times Lohweyler,
now Lohnweiler, in the parish of Lauterecken in the Pfalz or Pala-
tinate. The Lutheran church of Lauterecken began its records in the
year 1569, and all of the early record books, through the middle of
the nineteenth century, have been transferred to Protestantisches
Landeskirchenarchiv der Pfalz or the Archives of the Protestant
Churches of the Palatine Circuit, at Speyer am Rhein. A card admit-
ting one to the reading room of this library costs Rm. 2 per day or Rm.

3. Page 197 in The French Revolution and Religious Reform by William Milligan
Sloane, New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1901.

4. Treaty of Campo Formio, October 17, 1797.

5. Example: Tables de concordance des dates des calendriers .... by Smile

Lacoine, Paris, Librairie Polytechnique, 1891. (This requires some confusing calcula-
tions, however.)

6. Undoubtedly the best of these is : Die Zeitangaben des franzdsisch-republikanischen
Kalenders im V ergleich mit dent Gregorischen Kalender by A. Weimar; First Edition,
Mainz, 1929; Second Edition, Kaiserslautern, 193?.

7. Examples: Taschenbuch der Zeitrechnung by H. Grotefend. Taschenbuch fiir

Familiengeschichtsforschung by Friedrich Wecken. Both of these books have been
reprinted in several editions.

226

ANCESTOR-HUNTING IN GERMANY

5 for a whole week. Historisches Museum der Pfalz across the street
has a photostat machine and serves the searchers in the Archiv. Bap-
tism, marriage, and burial records from the middle of the nineteenth
century, to date, are kept by the Pfarrer or pastor in Lauterecken.
The city hall in Lauterecken has all the civil records, which were com-
menced about 1 79 8. 8 Access to the records in the church and in the
city hall is gratis. My Grossart (Groszarth) ancestors lived in the
town of Odernheim am Gian, also in the Pfalz. Civil records were
begun in Odernheim during the reign of Napoleon, but the city hall
has also all the Odernheim-parish registers of the Catholic, Lutheran,
and Reformed churches, back to the year 1710.

Probably the best-indexed genealogical collection in Germany is
the Zentralstelle fur deutsche Personen- und Familiengeschichte or
Central Depository for German Personal and Family History, in the
Deutsche Biicherei or German Library in the city of Leipzig. The
admission fee to the Zentralstelle is Rm. 1 per day (only about 25c
for the American using Registermark tourist currency). For this
small sum one will be waited on hand and foot and will have brought
to him every book or magazine or pamphlet in which any mention of
the family surname (or surnames) can be found in print. Much of
the material proves to be irrelevant, of course, but one finds here
an opportunity to exhaust nearly every possible printed source on any
surname. Here, for example, I learned for the first time of a Stein-
hauer coat-of-arms,9 10 which, while coming from east of Germany
(Latvija), rather than the west (Pfalz) whence my family comes,
and therefore probably of no provable connection, was nevertheless
of interest. The photostat department in the Deutsche Biicherei
serves searchers in the Zentralstelle.

My German ancestors all lived in the valley formed by the Lau-
ter, Gian, and Nahe rivers, as they flow from Kaiserslautern past
Kreuznach, to empty into the Rhein at Bingen. I had the great satis-
faction to trace the Steinhauer line as far back as I think it is possible
to trace it. The Lutheran records of Lauterecken parish were begun
in 1 569, and I was able to trace my lineage to the baptism of Sigfried
Steinhawer, son of Johannes Steinhawer, on Jubilate 10 Sunday, April

8. L’an sept de la Republique Frangaise.

9. In Beitrag zur Baltischen Wappenkunde . . . . , by Max Muller, Riga (Latvija),
Verlag Ernst Plates, 1931. (Volume 1.) Available also in the Library of Congress,
Washington.

10. The third Sunday after Easter.

227

ANCESTOR-HUNTING IN GERMANY

24, 1 5 86. 11 In the older form Steinhawer, the name is more clearly
cognate with “stone-hewer,” its English translation. The name con-
tinued to be spelled Steinhawer until sometime between 1652-80,
when the w was changed to u in conformity with general orthographic
transitions in the German language at that period. The descent of
the American branch of the family from Johannes, father of Sigfried,
is through the following lineage :

1. Johannes Steinhawer (buried January 17, 1621) married
Catharina .... (died 28. Heumonat 1616 — July 28, 1616).

2. Sigfried Steinhawer (baptized April 24, 1586) married,
February 5, 1611 (?) Clara Martin (?).

3. Johannes Steinhawer (baptized December 1, 1611 (?);
buried January 24, 1682) ; married, June 23, 1646, Johannatha
Poti (orBoTi?) (buried January 24, 1682.)

4. Johannes Steinhawer/Steinhauer (baptized April 18,
1652; died September 10, 1724); married, January 13, 1680,
Johanna Dorothea, nee Steinhauer.

5. Johann Caspar Steinhauer (baptized January 5/15, 1687,
OS/NS; died February 5, 1770); married, September 19, 1719,
Maria Elisabetha BlAsius (or Plasius) (baptized April 2, 1702;
died January 13, 1758).

6. Tobias Heinrich Steinhauer (born August 17, 1729; died
January 6, 1815); married, November 26, 1754, Anna Margaretha
Gross (born January 12, 1738; died December 20, 1789).

7. Philipp Peter Steinhauer (born February 8, 1771); mar-
ried (ist) January 31, 1797, Maria Catharina Weichel (born
June 8, 1773; died November 15, 1815).

8. Philipp Peter Steinhauer (born 30 vendemiaire VIII12 —
October 22, 1799; died at Frankenthal April 17, 1858); married
Christina Elisabetha Grossart (born at Odernheim 16/17 germi-
nal X — April 6/7, 1802; died at Odernheim May 30, 1887.)

Johannes Steinhawer (d. 1621) seems to have resided at Lau-
terecken, but his son Sigfried (b. 1586) appears to have settled about
1611 in the next village (just a 15 or 20-minute walk from Lau-
terecken), called Lohweyler at that time, now called Lohnweiler,
where my ancestors lived until perhaps 1797, when Peter Steinhauer

11. Julian calendar, or “Old Style.”

12. The birth of Philipp Steinhauer (1799-1858) is recorded on the last page of the
Heinzenhausen birth register for the year VII, for, vendemiaire being the first month of
the French calendar, the mayor apparently had not received his official blank book for the
year VIII yet. This has caused some confusion. He was born in 1799, however.

228

(Photographed in Protestantisches LandesTcirchenarchiv, Speyer)
TITLE-PAGE OF THE OLDEST EXISTING REGISTRY-BOOK OF THE LUTHERAN
CHURCH OF LAUTERECKEN PARISH (FOR THE YEARS 1569-95)

This 370-year-old Book Contains the Earliest Record (1586) of the Steinhawer (Stein-
hauer) family. Note the date, “Anno .... sesquemillesimum Nono et Sexagesimo”
(1569), it Was Begun. Through the Torn Corner Can be Seen Part of the Subtitle Page
Following, “Catalogus Baptizatorum Ecclesia LutereccSsi.” The book is now in the
Protestant Archives at Speyer am Rhein, Germany.

ANCESTOR-HUNTING IN GERMANY

(b. 1771) moved to Heinzenhausen, 15 minutes away. Peter Stein-
hauer (b. 1771) is said 13 to have died in the United States, but there
is no reliable proof of this.

Philipp Steinhauer (1799-1858) and his wife Elisabetha Gro-
ssart (Groszarth) (1802-87) had two sons, Philipp (1831-72) and
Friedrich (1835-1903), who emigrated to the United States when
Friedrich was 15 years old, or about 1850-51. Presumably they
landed at Philadelphia.

Philipp Steinhauer was born at Odernheim am Gian on May 29,
1831, served the Confederacy14 in the War Between the States, is
listed in the New Orleans city directories for 1867-68-69-72, died in
New Orleans May 29, 1872 (his 41st birthday!), and is buried in
Cypress Grove Cemetery (known also as “Firemen’s Cemetery”) in
New Orleans, Louisiana. He is believed to have died unmarried
and childless.

Friedrich Steinhauer was born at Rockenhausen (Pfalz) on May
22, 1835. His cousin Joseph Landschiitz15 (1817-76) had come to
the United States shortly before and owned a pharmacy at 124 Cal-
lowhill Street, Philadelphia. Friedrich worked for him for a while,
and on January 18, 1859, Friedrich was elected16 apothecary of the
Philadelphia Dispensary, a charity hospital. Meanwhile Friedrich
had Anglicized his name gradually through Frederic to Frederick. In
the i860 census17 and in the city directories for 1861-63-64 he is
shown as boarding at the home of Mrs. Francis Hart, a widow, at
1 15 Craven Street, Philadelphia. Older members of the family seem
to recall hearing that he was married in Philadelphia about 1855 to
German-born Margaret A .... , said to have died in Philadelphia
about 1864, but this has not been proven yet, and his listing in the
i860 census implies that he was single at that time. About 1864 he
moved to Denver, Colorado, where he was prominent in civic affairs.18

13. This statement is made in the death record of his daughter Margaretha Steinhauer,
who died at Heinzenhausen January 5, 1871.

14. Louisiana Commissioner of Military Records: Records of Louisiana Confederate

Soldiers by Andrew B. Booth, New Orleans, 1920. Volume 3, book 2, page 690.

15. Mentioned in “Letters of Friedrich Steinhauer.” See footnote 19, below.

16. Philadelphia Dispensary : Rules .... for the medical relief of the poor, with the
annual report for 1858, and a list of contributors, managers and officers for 1859. Phila-
delphia, printed by Joseph Rakestraw, 1859. In the Rare Book Department (“Toner Col-
lection”) of the Library of Congress, Washington.

1 7. Pennsylvania Volume 52, Philadelphia Ward 6, page 745.

18. See his long obituary on the front page of The Denver Post for August 31, 1903.

229

ANCESTOR-HUNTING IN GERMANY

He was a member of the Colorado Territorial Legislature for two
years 1867-68. He was a member of the Denver School Board19
1873-92 and again 1899-1903, serving as secretary in 1873 and as
president 1891-92. He was president of the board of trustees of
Colorado School of Mines20 1878-99. Amongst Frederick Stein-
hauer’s friends in Denver was the Schinner family. Mme Schinner
(nee Vinot) was from the village of Villafans (Haute-Saone),
France, where she had gone to a school taught by Rev. Joseph Bar-
denet, great-uncle of Mile Blanche Chobard. Blanche Chobard was
born at Gex21 (Ain), France, February 9, 1849, attended L’ Institu-
tion de Mile Hirsch at Vesoul (Haute-Saone) whence she was gradu-
ated in 1865 as the honor student, emigrated to the United States
about 1867, and settled in Saint Louis, Missouri. Blanche Chobard
had an aunt, Mrs. Jan Ermerins22, in Denver. While on a visit to
this aunt, Blanche Chobard was invited to the Schinner home, and met
Frederick Steinhauer at dinner. This acquaintance culminated even-
tually in the marriage of Frederick Steinhauer and Blanche Chobard
at Saint Louis on November 27, 1871. They had seven children, all
born in Denver:23

1. Bertha Steinhauer (1873-1920).

2. Frederic Chobard Steinhauer (living). (Had four sons).

3. Emil Steinhauer (1877-79).

4. Jessie Louise Steinhauer (living). (Now Mrs. Frank Addi-
son Young) .

5. Karl Edmund Steinhauer (living) (married, divorced).

6. Ernest Philip Steinhauer (1884-1936). (Had one son, who
is the author of this article).

7. Claire Elizabeth Steinhauer (living).

19. His work in founding Denver’s schools is the subject of “Letters of Friedrich
Steinhauer,” in The Colorado Magazine published by the State Historical Society of
Colorado, Denver, The State Museum, July, 1933. (Volume X, number 4, pages, 156-58.)

20. A branch, at Golden, Colorado, of the state university at Boulder.

21. Ten miles from Geneve, Switzerland, reached in about an hour by interurban
street-car from Geneve to Ferney and by bus from Ferney to Gex. The street-car rides
from Geneve (Switzerland) to Ferney (France) and return were an interesting incident
in my European trip, as I was not asked to show my passport in crossing the international
border. Customs inspectors of both countries searched the street-car, however.

22. Genealogie der familie Ermerins 1590-1908 , by P. C. Bloys van Treslong Prins,
‘S-Gravenhage, De Nederl. Boek- en Steendrukkerij, 1909. (Page 16.)

23. The Steinhauer genealogy has been published in Deutsches Geschlechterbuch
(genealogisches Handbuch biirgerlicher Familien), Gorlitz, C. A. Starke, 1935. (Volume
86, pages 403-11, etc.) (There are numerous errors, both editorial and typographical, in
this, however.)

23O

ANCESTOR-HUNTING IN GERMANY

Frederick Steinhauer continued pharmacy as his profession in
Denver, being for a time in the partnership of Steinhauer & Wal-
brach, and later by himself. Frederick Steinhauer died at Denver,
Colorado, August 30, 1903, and is buried at Riverside Cemetery.
Blanche Chobard Steinhauer died at Denver, Colorado, February
3, 1925.

The writer did a little research in France also (on the Chobard
and related families: Chaudey,24 Bardenet,25 etc.), but found the

work more difficult there, because a pure amateur genealogist, who
has no pecuniary motive such as establishing a claim to an estate, is
regarded in France (as indeed in these United States!) as a little
“queer.”

I cannot close without mentioning European library systems. On
our visits to Washington, you and I walk boldly into the Library of
Congress, brief-case and all, without formality. But the French
Bibliotheque Nationale, or National Library, at Paris, is not open
to the common herd .... on entering its doors one is requested to
prove that he is a college graduate. After satisfying them on that
point, one is given (without charge) a one-day permit to enter the
reading rooms. Photostats can be obtained after several days’ delay.

The Preussische Staatsbibliothek, or Prussian State Library, Ger-
many’s national library on famous Unter den Linden in Berlin, is
a luxurious building open to anyone who will pay Rm. 1 for a one-
week library card. But .... if you turn in a call slip26 today, your
book will be ready for you to call for at the desk tomorrow. This
refers, of course, only to books to be drawn from the stacks ....
ready-reference books in daily demand, such as dictionaries, encyclo-
pedias, etc., are on open shelves in the reading room.

Some German city public libraries are open to the public without
charge, and some have a small admission fee. An annoyance to late-
summer tourists like myself is that most German public libraries close

24. Armorial general; precede d’un dictionnaire des termes du blason, 2. edition, by
J. B. Rietstap, Gouda, G. B. van Goor zonen (i884)-i887. (Volume 1, page 411.)

25. Armorial du premier empire; titres, majorats et armoiries concedes par Napoleon
Ier, by Vicomte Albert Reverend, Paris, au bureau de “L’Annuaire de la noblesse,” 1894.
(Tome 1, page 48.)

26. The call slips must be bought. The catalog is not a loose-leaf printed or type-
written card catalog like in American libraries, but a set of bound books, in which acces-
sions are interlined in pen and ink in gwa.ri-alphabetic order !

231

ANCESTOR-HUNTING IN GERMANY

for the whole month of August, 27 for cleaning, renovating, vaca-
tions,28 etc.

In the German churches and city halls, however, there are, today,
excellent facilities and organization for the finding of the original
records of one’s ancestors, and I hope that my readers of German
descent will not fail to take advantage of them.

27. This month is chosen probably because German schools are closed during the same
month. Germany is north of the United States and cooler in summer, so that the school
year is September through July. Incidentally, German school children have no classes
after 1 p. m. — but they have to go to school on Saturdays.

28. The customary German vacation is one month, instead of two weeks as in the U. S

mason

a .son an

d Allied Families

By Herold R. Finley, Cranston, Rhode Island

URNAME authorities disagree on the origin of the name
“Mason.” Mr. Lower, in his “Patronymica Britannica,”
states that it originated either from an occupation, such as
a stonemason or woodmason, or from a town in North-
umberland. Mr. Bardsley, in his “Dictionary of English and Welsh
Surnames,” agrees that it might possibly have originated from an
occupation, but also says it might be a baptismal name, meaning “the
son of Matthew,” which in the old French was spelled “Mayhew,”
shortened to Maye, then May, and finally became Mayson.

(M. A. Lower: “Patronymica Britannica.” C. W. Bardsley:

“Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

Arms — Or, a Hon rampant azure.

Crest — A mermaid with comb and glass proper.

Motto — Dum spiro spero. (Burke: “General Armory.”)

Three men bearing the surname Mason came to America and
established families. John Mason, who arrived in 1630, was the first
of the name in Massachusetts and in Connecticut. Sampson Mason,
the second emigrant of the name, and the progenitor of our line, came
from England about 1649-50, and was of Rehoboth and Swansea,
Massachusetts. Colonel George Mason, a member of the English
Parliament, was the third emigrant, and reached Virginia about 1651-
1652. The family tradition that these men were brothers is incorrect.
(Dr. Philip Mason: “A Legacy to My Children,” pp. 7, 9, 12.)

1. Sampson Mason, the progenitor of our line in America, was
born in England and died, probably, in Rehoboth, Massachusetts, as
his death is recorded there, and was buried there September 15, 1676.
Dr. Philip Mason in his book, “A Legacy to My Children,” says, “by
the concurrent authority of tradition Sampson Mason was a soldier,
or as Baylies has it in his ‘Historical Memoir of Plymouth,’ a dragoon
in the Republican army of Oliver Cromwell.” In England his occu-
pation was that of a shoemaker. The first appearance of Sampson
Mason’s name in this country is in the Suffolk records of the settle-

233

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

ment of the estate of Edward Bullock, a Dorchester man, in whose
will, dated 25-5-1649 (July 25, 1649), a debt is noted as “due to
Sampson Mason for wife’s shoes.”

In the Suffolk Registry of Deeds is an entry showing that in 1651
Sampson Mason purchased a house and land in Dorchester from
William Betts, which he later sold to Jacob Hewins. He then went to
Rehoboth, Massachusetts. According to “An Historical Memoir of
the Colony of New Plymouth,” he was one of the founders of Swan-
sea, Massachusetts, where he was admitted an inhabitant before 1669,
and where he was in the second rank of those who received land. He
is mentioned in a list of those named in the division of lands in the
“North Purchase,” which became Attleboro, Massachusetts, and was
a proprietor of Swansea, Massachusetts, where his descendants for
many generations were prominent. He was evidently a man of means
as he was a large property owner, and during the King Philip’s War
his widow gave £13.5.10, one of the larger contributions made.

In spite of the statement in “An Historical Memoir of the Colony
of New Plymouth” that Sampson Mason was a founder of Swansea,
that he was admitted an inhabitant before 1669, and that he was in
the second rank of those who received land there, it is believed that he
never actually moved from Rehoboth, as most of his estate was there,
ten of his children were born there, and both his death and the death
of his wife are recorded there. In his will, dated October 22, 1672,
he calls himself a “cordwainer,” and names his “deare wife Mary sole
executrix.” Her will was dated at Rehoboth, January 28, 1712-13,
and was probated December 6, 1714.

Sampson Mason married Mary Butterworth, who died in August,
1714, and was probably a daughter of John Butterworth, of Wey-
mouth, Massachusetts. Children, first three born in Dorchester,
Massachusetts, last ten at Rehoboth. 1. Noah, of whom further. 2.
Sampson, born probably in 1654; was one of the founders of the Sec-
ond Baptist Church in Swansea, Massachusetts. 3. John, born probably
between March 18 and May 12, 1656, died March 19, 1683; mar-
ried, October 15, 1679, Content Wales. 4. Samuel, born February
12, 1656-57, died January 21 or 25, 1743-44; married (first), March
2, 1682, Elizabeth Miller, died March 3, 1718; (second), November
4, 1718, Mrs. Lydia Tillinghast, who died in 1720. 5. Sarah, born

February 15, 1657-58. 6. Mary, born February 7, 1659-60, died

234

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

November 15, 1727; married, January 7, 1684, Rev. Ephraim Whea-
ton. 7. James, born October 30, 1661. 8. Joseph, born March 6,

1662-63, died May 19, 1748; married (first), March 12, 1683, Anne
Daggett; (second), September 4, 1686, Lydia Bowen. 9. Bethia,
born October 15, 1665, died before 1712; married, May 23, 1688,
John Wood, who married (second) , January 31, 1711-12, Mrs. Char-
ity Miller. 10. Isaac, born July 15, 1667, died at Swansea, Massa-
chusetts, January 25, 1741-42; married Hannah. 11. Pelatiah, born
April 1, 1669, died March 29, 1763; married, May 22, 1694, Hepsi-
beth or Hepzibah Brooks, who died at Swansea, August 24, 1727.
12. Benjamin, born October 20, 1670, died August or September 1740 ;
married Ruth Rounds. 13. Thankful, born October 27, 1672, was
living in 1743; married, June 17, 1689, Thomas Bowen.

(J. N. Arnold: “Vital Records of Rehoboth, Massachusetts,” pp.
675, 850. “New England Historical and Genealogical Register,”
Vol. VI, p. 356; Vol. XVIII, pp. 245-46, 247-53. Francis Baylies:
“An Historical Memoir of the Colony of New Plymouth,” Vol. I,
Part II, pp. 207, 217, 344. Dr. Philip Mason: “A Legacy To My
Children,” pp. 10-13. Alverdo H. Mason: “Genealogy of the

Sampson Mason Family,” Part I, pp. 6-1 1, 15-16, 19-20, 22, 25-26,
29-30, 32- J- H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old Families of
Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. II, p. 1049. G. H. Tilton: “His-
tory of Rehoboth, Massachusetts,” p. 43. D. Benedict: “History of
the Baptist Denominations in America and Other Parts of the World,”
Vol. I, p. 427.)

II. Noah Mason, son of Sampson and Mary (Butterworth)
Mason, was born at Dorchester, Massachusets, between October 25,
1651, and February 8, 1651-52, was baptized in the First Church of
Dorchester, February 22, 1651-52, and died at Rehoboth, Massa-
chusetts, March 2, 1699-1700. He was a freeman, a resident of
Rehoboth, where his trade was that of a shoemaker. During King
Philip’s War, he served under Major Bradford in the expedition
against the Narragansetts, and made a contribution of fifteen shillings
to the war fund.

Noah Mason married (first) Martha, who was buried February
6, 1675, married (second), December 6, 1677, Sarah Fitch, who
died March 16, 1718-19, daughter of John and Mary Fitch. Chil-
dren of the second marriage, all born at Rehoboth, Massachusetts:

235

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

i. Noah (2), of whom further. 2. John, born November 28, 1680,
died August 29, 1716, unmarried. 3. Mary, born December 12,
1682; married (first), November 26, 1723, John House, of Provi-
dence, Rhode Island; (second), intentions recorded at Rehoboth,
August 17, 1728, John Dexter. 4. Daniel, born July 8, 1685, died in
1750; married, intentions recorded at Rehoboth, January 13, 1727-
1728, Susannah Carpenter. 5. Timothy, born March 17, 1686-87,
was drowned December 9, 1742; married, November 16, 1721, Sib-
bel Hunt. 6. Sarah, born February 1, 1688-89, died June 9, 1744;
married, December 27, 17 11, Daniel Brown. 7. Hannah, born
December 2, 1690, died in 1716, unmarried. 8. Martha, born June
16, 1693, died November 22, 1747; married, September 29, 1715,
George Bristow, Jr., or George Barstow, Jr.

(A. H. Mason: “Genealogy of the Sampson Mason Family,” pp.
16-17, 35-37, 42. J. N. Arnold: “Vital Records of Rehoboth, Mas-
sachusetts,” pp. 138, 675, 850. J. H. Beers: “Representative Men

and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. II, p. 1049.
“New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol. XVIII,
p. 248. G. M. Bodge : “Soldiers in King Philip’s War,” p. 463.)

III. Noah (2) Mason, son of Noah and Sarah (Fitch) Mason,
was born at Rehoboth, Massachusetts, December 17, 1678, and died
August 29, 1744. He was a shoemaker by trade. About 1709 he
purchased his uncle’s homestead, which was located in what is now
probably East Providence, Rhode Island. He also bought a half-
interest in the Providence ferry. It appears that Noah (2) Mason
and his wife were in England in 1710, visiting members of his wife’s
family, among them her grandmother Atkins, possibly her maternal
grandmother. He later sold his homestead and ferry rights to his
brother, John Mason. In the deed he is designated as “ferry keeper.”

Noah (2) Mason married, intentions published in Rehoboth, Octo-
ber 16, 1708, Mary Sweeting, who was probably born near Over
Stowey, Somersetshire, England, and died August 18, 1738, daughter
of Henry and Joanna Sweeting. Children, all born in Rehoboth: 1.

Mary, born March 28, 1710; married, March 29, 1733, Samuel Bar-
stow. 2. Noah, born February 10, 1712, died September 2, 1738,
unmarried. 3. Joanna, born April 25, 1714, died July 27, 1738,
unmarried. 4. Martha, born January 29, 1716, died in infancy. 5.
Hannah, born January 6, 1716-17, was unmarried April 9, 1750. 6.

236

-Vs

VIEW OP GARDEN AT THE MASON RESIDENCE — ATTLEBORO, MASSACHUSETTS

SOUTHEAST VIEW OF THE MASON GARDEN- TEN MILE RIVER IN THE BACKGROUND

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

John, of whom further. 7. Sarah, born February 25, 1720, probably
died before August, 1744; married, November 24, 1743, William
Brown. 8. Lydia, born November 8, 1723, died September 17, 1744;
married, July 31, 1744, Thomas Kendrick.

(A. H. Mason: “Genealogy of the Sampson Mason Family,”

pp. 1 7» 33- J- N. Arnold: “Vital Records of Rehoboth, Massachu-
setts,” pp. 675-76, 850. J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old
Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. II, p. 1049.)

IV. John Mason , the youngest son of Noah (2) and Mary
(Sweeting) Mason, was born at Rehoboth, Massachusetts, September
9, 1718. He was a resident of Rehoboth, and was a tanner by trade.
In 1754 John Mason was adjudged non compos mentis and placed
under the guardianship of Thomas Allen and Isaiah Hunt. The
court terminated the guardianship in 1758, but it was resumed in
1763, and continued with various guardians until August 3, 1783,
when his guardians, William Windsor and Samuel Whitman, reported
the sale of his real estate.

John Mason married, intentions recorded at Rehoboth, August
20, 1748, Elizabeth Grafton, of Providence, Rhode Island, who died
August 20, 1779. Children, all born at Rehoboth: 1. Noah, born

June 29, 1749, died November 29, 1764. 2. William, born December
8, 1751. 3. John (2), of whom further.

(A. H. Mason: “Genealogy of the Sampson Mason Family,” p.
82. J. N. Arnold: “Vital Records of Rehoboth, Massachusetts,” pp.
676-77. J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old Families of

Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. II, p. 1049.)

V. John (2) Mason, son of John and Elizabeth (Grafton)
Mason, was born at Rehoboth, Massachusetts, June 20, 1762, and
died at Attleboro, Massachusetts, November 28, 1834. He was one
of the pioneers of Attleboro.

John (2) Mason married, May 7, 1795, Mrs. Hannah (Richard-
son) Campbell, died April 1, 1839, daughter of Ebenezer and Sarah
Richardson, and widow of John Campbell. She was probably the
Hannah Richardson, of Rehoboth, who married, intentions published
November 30, 1784, John Cammel (Campbell), of Rehoboth. Chil-
dren, all except the first born at Attleboro, Massachusetts : 1 . Elizabeth,
born at Rehoboth, February 27, 1 796, died August 22, 1 834, unmarried.

237

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

2. Mary, born January 14, 1798, died December 27, 1867. 3. James,
born February 26, 1800, died February 12, 1867; married, in 1826,
Abigail Freeman. 4. Moses, born May 29, 1802, died September 4,
1885; married (first), December 24, 1829, Caroline Wellman, who
died in 1838; (second), August 29, 1844, Eliza Sophia Dunster, who
died in 1866; (third), September 20, 1868, Catherine Gilbert. 5.
Noah (3), of whom further.

(A. H. Mason: “Genealogy of the Sampson Mason Family,”

pp. 82, 149, 272-73. J. N. Arnold: “Vital Records of Rehoboth,

Massachusetts,” pp. 677-78. J. H. Beers: “Representative Men

and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. II, p. 1049.
A. Borden: “Our County and Its People — Bristol County, Massa-

chusetts,” Personal References, p. 149. “Vital Records of Attleboro,
Massachusetts,” pp. 176, 355, 492.)

VI. Noah (3) Mason, son of John (2) and Hannah (Richardson-
Campbell) Mason, was born at Attleboro, Massachusetts, March 8,
1805, and died September 14, 1882. He was a dealer in groceries
and general merchandise at Mansfield, Massachusetts, and later at
Attleboro.

Noah (3) Mason married, May 20, 1830, Harriet Wood Fisher,
of Attleboro, Massachusetts, born there December 20, 1808, died
August 7, 1880. Children, all born at Attleboro: 1. Herbert N. or

Noah Herbert, born March 13, 1831; married (first) Mary L. W.
Titus, who died at Attleboro, Massachusetts, February 17, 1862;
(second) Mary M. Packard, who died February 28, 1904. 2. George
Allen, of whom further. 3. Harriet Eliza, born July 30, 1835; mar-
ried Benjamin A. Cummings. 4. Fisher Nelson, born August 28,
1837. 5- Calvin Henry, born March 12, 1839. 6. Warren Sanford,
born April 1, 1840. 7. Emily Amanda, born September 30, 1841 ; mar-
ried Albert J. Richardson, of North Attleboro, Massachusetts. 8.
Caroline Frances, born September 23, 1843. 9- Marzette or Narzett
Fletcher, born October 2, 1844; married, May 20, 1880, Frank B.
Robbins.

(J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old Families of South-
eastern Massachusetts,” Vol. II, pp. 1049-50. A. Borden: “Our

County and Its People — Bristol County, Massachusetts,” Personal
References, p. 149. “Vital Records of Attleboro, Massachusetts,” pp.
I75.i76,492-)

238

MASON GARDEN WITH PERGOLA AND STATUARY

>LA — NORTH

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

VII. George Allen Mason, son of Noah (3) and Harriet Wood
(Fisher) Mason, was born at Attleboro, Massachusetts, February
12, 1834. He was educated in the common schools and for some
years was engaged in the mercantile business. Later he dealt exten-
sively in finely bred horses.

George Allen Mason married, in 1857, Mary Ann Cushman, of
Middleboro, Massachusetts. (Cushman VIII. ) Children: 1. Fred-
erick George, of whom further. 2. William H., a manufacturer.

(J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old Families of South-
eastern Massachusetts,” Vol. II, p. 1050. “Vital Records of Attle-
boro, Massachusetts,” p. 176. A. Borden: “Our County and Its

People — Bristol County, Massachusetts,” Personal References, p.
149. Family data.)

VIII. Frederick George Mason, son of George Allen and Mary
Ann (Cushman) Mason, was born at Attleboro, Massachusetts, in
1858, and died January 6, 1935.

After completing his formal education in the schools of his birth-
place, Mr. Mason went to Providence, Rhode Island, to supplement
his formal studies with the business training in the Bryant and Strat-
ton Business College. At the age of eighteen years he entered the
employ of the then comparatively new First National Bank, of Attle-
boro. There was probably no banking service that he did not per-
form, and promotion came as fast as there was place for his increasing
experience. He was made cashier in 1903 and in 1926 was elected
vice-president, but still carried on his work as cashier. The span of
his connection with the bank covered fifty-eight years.

The occasion of his fiftieth year with the bank was fittingly recog-
nized. It was brought out then that Mr. Mason had seen practically
all of the original incorporators of the institution pass on, while he
remained, giving his help and guidance, which was always sought, to
those who one by one took the place of the founders. His single-
minded devotion to his work deprived him of much of the time and
energy that he would have given to public affairs and personal enjoy-
ment. He contributed to civic progress and happiness but steadfastly
refused political preferment. Fraternally, he was affiliated with Eze-
kiel Bates Lodge, Free and Accepted Masons, which he served as
treasurer for fifteen years, and the Royal Arch Chapter. He was a

239

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

member of the Massachusetts Cashiers’ Association, serving on its
board of directors and as its president, and he was a charter member
of the Grand Army of the Republic Dining Club, one of the interest-
ing social organizations characteristic of New England, and was
always keenly interested in the welfare of men, who were veterans of
the War Between the States. He attended the Second Congregational
Church of Attleboro, and was wholly dependable for the furtherance
of any worthy humanitarian enterprise.

Frederick George Mason married, at Attleboro, October 20,
1886, Mabel Wheaton Carpenter. (Carpenter IX.)

When Mr. Mason died, in the seventy-sixth year of his life, many
tributes were paid to his memory. Of these, that passed by the direc-
tors of the bank, of the staff of which he was dean, is both comprehen-
sive and revealing:

Frederick G. Mason
1876—1935

Nearly threescore years of devoted service !

Since 1876, when Homer Daggett called in Frederick G. Mason
to assist him, the foremost interest of Mr. Mason, outside of his home
life, has been this institution which he loved and served.

He had what might well be termed an almost militant pride in the
good name and integrity of The First National Bank of Attleboro.

His approach to friends and customers was thoroughly in keeping
with his immaculate appearance, which was such a distinguishing char-
acteristic of this American gentleman.

Though not so active in recent years, his attendance at the bank
was not interrupted except for occasional respites, his interest in its
affairs was undiminished and his background of long experience was
valuable to the present active officers of the bank.

Those of us who knew him best and longest — one of us goes back
forty years in association with him — find it extremely difficult at this
time to give proper expression to our sentiments of esteem, respect
and sorrow.

We can only echo those words which we think he must be hearing
even now :

“Well done, thou good and faithful servant; enter thou into the
joy of thy Lord.”

(J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old Families of South-
eastern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, p. 1580. Family data.)

240

Car^errtfr

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

(The Carpenter Line)

Arms — Argent, a greyhound passant, and chief sable.

Crest — A greyhound’s head, erased per fesse sable and argent.

Motto — Celeritas, virtus, Fidelitas.

(Amos B. Carpenter : “A Genealogical History of the Rehoboth Branch of
the Carpenter Family in America,” p. 29.)

Carpenter, as a surname, is of occupational origin, meaning “the
carpenter,” from the Old French carpentier, a worker in wood. The
name appears very frequently in the Hundred Rolls of various Eng-
lish counties.

(C. W. Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

(The Family in England)

I. William Carpenter, son of William Carpenter, was born in
1576 and was a carpenter by trade in the city of London. He rented
certain tenements and gardens in Houndsditch in 1625 “to him devised
for 41 years with a covenant to build within 5 years, which tenements
and gardens were heretofore conveyed to the city’s use for the sup-
port of the Carpenter Free School by John Carpenter, Town Clerk of
London.”

William Carpenter came to America in the ship “Bevis,” accom-
panied by his son William (2), his son’s wife Abigail, and their chil-
dren. Nothing, however, is known about him, after he arrived here.
At Southampton he was registered at the time of emigration as a
carpenter by trade, from Wherwell, but it is evident that he was a
resident of London. The family being dissenters were obliged to
leave London, and William went to Wherwell, while his brother
Alexander went to Leyden.

(A. B. Carpenter: “A Genealogical History of the Rehoboth

Branch of the Carpenter Family in America,” p. 34.)

(The Family in America)

I. William (2) Carpenter, son of William Carpenter, was born
in England in 1605, and died at Rehoboth, Massachusetts, February
7, 1658. He came to this country in the ship “Bevis,” together with
other members of his family, and, with his wife, Abigail, settled at
Weymouth, Massachusetts, where he was made a freeman in 1640.
In 1641 and 1643 he was a representative from Weymouth to the
General Court. About 1642 he was appointed captain for one or
more years by the General Court of Massachusetts at Boston. He

241

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

became an inhabitant of Rehoboth, Massachusetts, in 1645, and in
that year was made a freeman there and served as representative to
the General Court. During 1643-49 he served as proprietors’ and
town clerk. He left a will, in which he bequeathed to son William
his Latin, Hebrew and Greek books, which implies that he was
an educated man.

William (2) Carpenter married, in England, Abigail, whose sur-
name is not known, and who died February 22, 1687. Children: 1.

John, born in England about 1628. 2. William (3), of whom fur-

ther. 3. Joseph, born in England about 1633, buried May 6, 1675;
married Margaret Sutton, who died in 1700. 4. Hannah, born at

Weymouth, Massachusetts, April 3, 1640. 5. Abiah (twin), born

April 9, 1643. 6. Abigail (twin), born April 9, 1643; married, in

1 659, John Titus. 7. Samuel, born about 1644; married, May 25,

1660, Sarah Readaway.

(Ibid., pp. 40-41, 44-45-47-48. “Representative Men and Old
Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, p. 1579. “Vital
Records of Rehoboth, Massachusetts,” p. 808.)

II. William (3) Carpenter, son of William (2) and Abigail Car-
penter, was born in England about 1631, and died at Rehoboth, Mas-
sachusetts, January 26, 1703. The inventory of his estate amounted
to £215-5-4. He followed the occupation of farming in Rehoboth,
where his home was located on the left of the road leading from East
Providence Meeting House to Rehoboth, fifty or sixty rods from the
crossing of the Ten Mile River.

William (3) Carpenter was a man of ability and character and a
wise counselor in the Colony. In 1668 he was made town clerk of
Rehoboth and, except for the year 1698, held that office until his
death. In 1668 he was also chosen deacon of the church and he
served as deputy to the General Court of Plymouth. He was also one
of the committee to settle the boundary between Taunton and the
North Purchase in 1682. Three years later, at a meeting of the
purchasers of the North Purchase, he was chosen surveyor. Speci-
mens of his handwriting show fine penmanship.

William (3) Carpenter married (first), October 5, 1651, Priscilla
Bennett, who died October 20, 1663. He married (second), Decem-
ber 10, 1663, Miriam Searles, Sayles or Sale, who died May 1, 1722.

242

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Children of the first marriage, born at Rehoboth, Massachusetts: i.

John, born October 19, 1652; married Rebecca Readaway. 2. Wil-
liam, born June 20, 1659, died March 10, 1718-19; married, April
8, 1685, Elizabeth Robinson. 3. Priscilla, born July 14, 1661; mar-
ried Richard Sweet. 4. Benjamin, born October 20, 1663, died April

18, 1738; married, March 14, 1691, Hannah Strong. Children of

second marriage, born at Rehoboth, Massachusetts: 5. Josiah, born

December 18, 1664, died February 28, 1727; married, November 24,
1692. 6. Nathaniel, born May 12, 1667; married (first), September

19, 1693, Rachel Cooper, who died July 9, 1694; (second) Mary
Preston; (third), July 8, 1707, Mary Cooper. 7. Daniel, born Octo-
ber 8, 1669; married (first), April 15, 1695, Bethiah Bliss; (sec-
ond), May 30, 1704, Elizabeth Butterworth; (third), December 12,
1710, Margaret Thurston; (fourth), October 15, 1718, Mary or
Margaret Hunt. 8. Noah, born March 28, 1672, died in April,
1756; married (first), December 3, 1700, Sarah Johnson ; (second),
May 22, 1727, Ruth Follet Talbott; (third), intentions published
November 29, 1745, Tabithy Bishop. 9. Miriam, born October 26,
1674, died May 21, 1706; married, June 23, 1691, Jonathan Bliss.
10. Obadiah, of whom further. 11. Ephraim, born April 25, 1681,
died young. 12. Ephraim (again), born April 25, 1683-84, died April

20, 1743; married (first), August 14, 1704, Hannah Read; (sec-
ond), March 24, 1719, widow Martha (Ide) Carpenter. 13. Han-
nah, born April 10, 1684-85; married, November 23, 1703, Jonathan
Chaffee. 14. Abigail, born April 15, 1687, died January 15, 1781;
married, November 12, 1706, Daniel Perrin.

(A. B. Carpenter: “A Genealogical History of the Rehoboth

Branch of the Carpenter Family in America,” pp. 51, 52, 53, 54, 55,
56. “Representative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massa-
chusetts,” Vol. Ill, p. 1579. “Vital Records of Rehoboth, Massachu-
setts,” pp. 78, 571, 808-09.)

III. Obadiah C arp enter, son of William (3) and Miriam (Searles,
Sayles or Sale) Carpenter, was born at Rehoboth, Massachusetts,
March 12, 1677-78, and died October 25, 1749, “in his 73d year.”

Obadiah Carpenter married, November 6, 1703, Deliverance
Preston, of Dorchester, Massachusetts, born October 7, 1681, died
June 12, 1767, daughter of Deacon Daniel and Abigail (Jackson)

243

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Preston, and granddaughter of Deacon Daniel Preston. Children:
i. Edward, born October 5, 1705, died February 24, 1771; married
(first), May 23, 1728, Mary Carpenter; (second), December 2,
1743, Dorothy Walker. 2. Obadiah (2), of whom further. 3.
Nehemiah, born September 28, 1708, died Match 19, 1711-12.
4. William, born June 26, 1711, died August 23, 1768; married
(first), September 25, 1734, Abigail White; (second), in 1757, Sarah
Blake. 5. Nehemiah (again), born June 24, 1714, died October 19,
1715. 6. Deliverance, born May 29, 1717; married, November 16,

1 737, John Wright. 7. Josiah, born October 8, 1719, died in 1746-
1747; married, October 25, 1742, Huldah Walker. 8. John, born
March 7, 1726-27, died April 26, 1754; married (intentions pub-
lished September 30, 1749), Anna Read.

(A. B. Carpenter: “A Genealogical History of the Rehoboth

Branch of the Carpenter Family in America,” pp. 56, 71-73. “Repre-
sentative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol.
Ill, p. 1579. “Vital Records of Rehoboth, Masaschusetts,” pp. 573,
809.)

IV. Obadiah (2) Carpenter, son of Obadiah and Deliverance
(Preston) Carpenter, was born February 16, 1705-06, and died at
Attleboro, Massachusetts, January 6, 1764. His will was proved
January 30, 1764. He was a farmer by occupation and served as a
deacon in the church in Attleboro. Both he and his wife are buried
in the old cemetery at Attleboro, Massachusetts.

Obadiah (2) Carpenter married, December 12, 1728, Mrs. Bethia
(Carpenter) Lyon, daughter of Daniel Carpenter. She was born
September 23, 1706, died January 15, 1788, at Foxborough, Massa-
chusetts, at the home of her son, Nehemiah. Children, born at Attle-
boro, Massachusetts: 1. Bethia, born December 6, 1729, died Janu-

ary 27, 1793; married, November 30, 1749, Peter Thacher. 2.
Nehemiah, born October 20, 1731, died May 14, 1799; married
(first), September 17, 1752, Elizabeth Sweet; (second), in 1773-74,
widow Sarah Hartshorn. 3. Sybil, born October 20, 1733; married,
April 4, 1755, Joseph French. 4. Huldah, born September 21, 1735;
married, December 25, 1758, Nathaniel Read. 5. Deliverance, born
February 27, 1737-38, died March 20 or 26, 1789; married (first),
August 10, 1762, Samuel Read, Jr.; (second) Moses Walker. 6.
Hannah, born June 10, 1740, died April 20, 1790; married, May 29,

244

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

1760; Zachariah Carpenter. 7. Obadiah, born September 2, 1742.
died December 6, 1810; married, October 16, 17 66, Amy or Mercy
Lee. 8. Daniel, of whom further. 9. Lucy, born February 14, 1746;
married, April 28, 1768, Caleb Carpenter. 10. Ezra, born January
30, 1748-49, died May 20, 1750.

(A. B. Carpenter: “A Genealogical History of the Rehoboth

Branch of the Carpenter Family in America,” pp. 72, 112, 114, 115.
“Representative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachu-
setts,” Vol. Ill, p. 1579. “Vital Records of Attleboro, Massachu-
setts,” pp. 61, 62, 63, 65, 66, 67, 648.)

V. Daniel Carpenter, son of Obadiah (2) and Bethia (Carpenter-
Lyon) Carpenter, was born at Attleboro, Massachusetts, September
29, 1744, and died there April 14, 1803. He followed the occupa-
tion of farming in Attleboro.

Daniel Carpenter married (intentions published January 11,
17 66) on January 30, 1766, Elizabeth Tyler, born at Attleboro, Mas-
sachusetts, January 14, 1747-48, daughter of John and Anne (Black-
enton) Tyler, of that town. She died November 17, 1821. She mar-
ried (second), November 3, 1805, as his second wife, Thomas Sweet,
of Attleboro. Children: 1. John, born September 1, 1766, died

March 2, 1838; married (first), February 21, 1793, Molly Tyler;
(second), in 1813, Lydia Potter. 2. Daniel (2), of whom further.
3. Ezra, born May 11, 1770, died February 27, 1821; married, June
17, 1 79 5 , Mary Follett. 4. Betty, born March 28, 1772, died March

5, 1835; married, intentions published April 2, 1792-93, Samuel
Thacher. 5. Samuel, born May 20, 1774, died November 1, 1775.

6, Remember, born February 8, 1776; married, October 11, 1801,
Betsey Read. 7. Ebenezer, born October 25, 1781, or according to
the Family Bible record, October 25, 1780; married, August 17,
1806, Clarissa Kent. 8. Jesse, born September 30, 1783, died June

7, 1857; married, December 19, 1805, Philena Richardson. 9.
Nancy, born August 11, 1786; married, February 19, 1804, Spencer
Blanding. 10. Samuel (2), born January 12, 1789, died March 3,
1861; married, October 19, 1815, Nancy Ingraham. 11. Elizabeth,
born November 1, 1792, died March 12, 1825; married, February
11, 1819, Benjamin Bowen.

(A. B. Carpenter: “A Genealogical History of the Rehoboth

Branch of the Carpenter Family in America,” pp. 115, 212, 213.

245

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

“Representative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachu-
setts,” Vol. Ill, pp. 1579-89. “Vital Records of Attleboro, Massa-
chusetts,” pp. 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 273, 361, 572, 646, 648.)

VI. Daniel (2) Carpenter , son of Daniel and Elizabeth (Tyler)
Carpenter, was born at Attleboro, Massachusetts, April 2, 1768, and
died September 3, 1835. He, like his ancestors, spent his life in cul-
tivating the land in Attleboro. He was captain of a militia company,
but seems not to have had any active part in town affairs.

Daniel (2) Carpenter married, March 6, 1794, Alice Richardson,
born in 1770, died January 28, 1844, daughter of Daniel Richardson.
She was a sister of Philena Richardson, who married Jesse Carpenter,
younger brother of Daniel (2) Carpenter. Children, born at Attle-
boro, Massachusetts: 1. Daniel, born April 5, 1795, died September

6. 1813. 2. Roxy, or Roxse, born August 24, 1801, died March 16,

1845; married (first), October 25, 1838, William Harris; (second)
Leonard Stone. 3. Sylvia, born June 17, 1805, died March 17, 1842;
married, September 1, 1830, Leonard Fuller. 4. Wheaton Allis or
Ellis, of whom further. 5. Charlotte, born May 24, 1809, died Octo-
ber 31, 1813.

(A. B. Carpenter: “A Genealogical History of the Rehoboth

Branch of the Carpenter Family in America,” p. 364. “Representa-
tive Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill,
p. 1580. “Vital Records of Attleboro, Massachusetts,” pp. 62, 66,
361, 646.)

VII. Wheaton Allis or Ellis Carpenter, son of Daniel (2) and
Alice (Richardson) Carpenter, was born at Attleboro, Massachu-
setts, December 24, 1806, and died April 25, 1876. He was buried in
Kirk Cemetery, of which he was sexton for many years. He made
his home, in Attleboro, where he followed the carpenter’s trade for a
while and later engaged in the lumber and coal business.

Wheaton Allis or Ellis Carpenter married, May 27, 1832, Alice
Briggs, daughter of Wheaton and Silda (Hunt) Briggs. She died
December 6, 1888, and was buried beside her husband. Children:
1. Shepard Wheaton, of whom further. 2. Daniel, born April 2,
1834, died November 2, 1851. 3. Nelson, born January 2, 1836. 4.
Maria Alice, born February 18, 1840, died April 5, 1877; married
Edward M. Jackson. 5. Lovina Briggs, born November 10, 1841,

246

depart OTfjeaton Carpenter

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

died February 22, 1865. 6. Henry Lafayette, born August 22, 1843,
died September 24, 1892; married (first), November 20, 1867, Chloe
M. Bliss; (second), a Miss Waldron. 7. Ellis, born June 20, 1845,
died January 28, 1864. 8. Mary Elizabeth, born April 2, 1847, died
September 15, 1848. 9. Mary Elizabeth (again), born January 30,

1849, died June 21, 1884; married Charles C. H. Pond. 10. Lyman,
born May 20, 1851.

(A. B. Carpenter: “A Genealogical History of the Rehoboth

Branch of the Carpenter Family in America,” pp. 364, 559. “Repre-
sentative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol.
Ill, p. 1580. “Vital Records of Attleboro, Massachusetts,” pp. 61,
62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 366, 647.)

VIII. Shepard IVheaton Carpenter , son of Wheaton Allis or
Ellis and Alice (Briggs) Carpenter, was born at Attleboro, Massa-
chusetts, January 23, 1833, died May 18, 1898, and was buried
in Woodlawn Cemetery. He was educated in the public schools of
Attleboro, Massachusetts. Working in his father’s store as a boy,
he later established his own business as a general merchant and took
an active interest in public affairs, serving in various offices. For sev-
eral years he was town clerk and assessor of Attleboro and also trus-
tee of schools for a time. He was one of the organizers of the
National Bank of Attleboro, as well as one of its original directors
and cashiers.

Shepard Wheaton Carpenter married, November 26, 1857,
Eliza Jane Capron. (Capron VI.) Children: 1. Daniel Edgar,

died young. 2. Mabel Wheaton, of whom further.

(“Representative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massa-
chusetts,” Vol. Ill, pp. 1580, 1582. “Vital Records of Attleboro,
Massachusetts,” p. 67.)

IX. Mabel IVheaton Carpenter, daughter of Shepard Wheaton
and Eliza Jane (Capron) Carpenter, married Frederick George
Mason. (Mason VIII.)

Mrs. Mabel Wheaton (Carpenter) Mason is widely active in the
community. She is a member of the Attleboro Chapter of the Daugh-
ters of the American Revolution and the Attleboro Round Table, of
both of which she is a charter member; a director and former treas-
urer of the Old Ladies’ Home; a member of the Second Congrega-
tional Church; and a member of the Ladies’ Sewing Club. She is also

247

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

most liberal in her support of charitable causes and is known for her
business ability and social charm.

On Armistice Day the city of Attleboro celebrated the acquisition
of several significant civic improvements and dedicated several beau-
tiful memorials, among which was the Memorial Gateway, of which
Mabel Carpenter Mason was one of the donors.

The Capron family and heirs have been active participants in the
community life in the city of their residence. One of the favorite
rendezvous of young and old of Attleboro, Massachusetts, and a spot
to which they point with pride is Capron Park.

In 1901 an area of forty-four acres was presented to the city of
Attleboro by Harford A. Capron, Mrs. Eliza Jane Carpenter and
Everett S. Capron, the children and heirs of Dennis Capron.

This original gift has been improved upon and utilized by the
park commission. Other interested individuals have given funds to
enhance the usefulness and beauty of the park. In the intervening
years a casino, fountain, shelter, wading pool, water system, bath
houses, tennis courts, baseball fields, bandstand, stone seats and trees
were added to the attractions of the park. The original zoo was
donated by children of the city through the “Daily Sun” in 1922, while
the present stone zoo just completed was made possible through the
Capron fund.

The following article, which appeared in the November 12, 1937,
issue of the “Attleboro Sun,” tells of this latest amelioration of the
park :

Designers and architects are commenting favorably on the beauty
of the new entrance gateway at Capron Park, since the photograph of
it appeared in the souvenir Armistice Day booklet. The gateway,
which was dedicated Thursday, is the gift of Mrs. Mabel Carpenter
Mason and the daughters of Dr. and Mrs. Charles E. Mooer and wel-
comes the park visitors to the City’s Garden spot with its pools and
zoo, its playground used by 14,700 children during the thirty-five days
of last summer’s season, the baseball park and tennis grounds, the
twenty acres of lawn, the 18,000 plants and shrubs.

It is indeed a wise and generous act that contains so much thought
and consideration as to have so contributed to the beauty and civic
pride of a whole community that many rather than a select few were
able to enjoy its benefits.

(Family data. Pamphlet: “Attleboro’s Armistice Day,” “Attle-
boro Sun,” issue of November 12, 1937.)

248

GATEWAY TO CAPRON PARK

(feprxm

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

(The Capron Line)

Arms — Sable, on a chevron between three lozenges, argent, each charged with an ermine
spot, another chevron gules. (Burke: “General Armory.”)

Capron and its variants, Capern, Chaperon, and Chapron, as sur-
names, originated from a nickname, probably a sobriquet for the
cowled monks, from the Middle English cape or cope, a hood, and the
Old French cape, augmented into Caperon. In various spellings,
chiefly Caperun, this surname occurs in early Hundred Rolls in several
English counties. According to Mr. Lower, in his book “Patronymica
Britannica” the name Caperoun, the Old French for a hood, is found
in the Roll of Battle Abbey, and it is of interest to note that the fam-
ily have long resided near Battel, the scene of the exploits of the
presumed founder of the name.

(C. W. Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”
M. A. Lower: “Patronymica Britannica.”)

I. Banfield Capron, American progenitor of this family, was born
in England in 1660 and died at Attleboro, Massachusetts, August 20,
1752. It is supposed that he was buried in “Peck Burying Ground,”
although no stone was ever erected to his memory. He came to New
England, probably from Chester, Cheshire. He was the first of the
Capron family in America and is said to be the ancestor of all the
Caprons in America up to 1817. Philip Capron, grandson of Banfield
Capron, wrote a historical account of his ancestor in 1817. Philip Cap-
ron, who was then in his seventy-third year, obtained a great part
of the information about his grandfather from other grandchildren,
from a number of other old people who were acquainted with them,
and from the history of the family records of the Scotts and Jenkses
with whom the Caprons became connected by marriage. The account
by Philip Capron follows, in part :

Banfield Capron was the only Capron, that we have any account

of, that came from Old England and settled in New England

He came from England in a singular manner. He, with three other
youths, each about fourteen years old, and all schoolmates, mutually
agreed to leave their native land, their relations, and friends, ....

and go over to New England They knew of a vessel that was

going to New England; and the night before it sailed, they privately
concealed themselves in the hold of the vessel, with a small matter of
provisions to live on a few days. After they had been to sea for a

249

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

few days there was a strange noise heard from the hold. The hatch-
way was opened, and those four boys came upon deck to the surprise
of all the ship’s crew. The captain said he must return with them,
for it was against the law for any captain of a vessel to transport any
of the inhabitants of England to America, except they got license to
go there. But both the mates and all the ships crew thought it best to
proceed on, and not return back, and the captain finally fell in with
their opinion, and brought them all safe to New England

The name of the town or county that the said Banfield came from
is forgotten; but it has been kept in remembrance that he came from

the northerly part of England, and that the town joined Wales

Soon after he came over, a family by the name of Callender, with
whom he was acquainted in England, came over and settled in Reho-
both, who are said to have been a very respectable family, and in afflu-
ent circumstances. The said Banfield became acquainted with them
again, and afterwards married one of Callender’s daughters, and set-
tled in the town of Barrington, joining Rehoboth, where he lived
about twenty years.

Mr. Daggett in an article on Banfield Capron says: “He came

alone as a cabin boy, when very young, to America from England, in
1674-75.” It is said that Banfield Capron sold his Barrington farm
to a Mr. LIumphreys and with his large family of children moved
“away back in the woods to what is now Attleboro” (Massachusetts),
where he could get more land and where he remained for the rest of
his life. Mr. Daggett says : “Banfield became a large landowner in

Attleboro. He purchased and laid out a large tract of land between
the Bungay River and the Falls. About fifteen years before he died,
it is said, he gave each of his eleven children a farm of two hundred
acres.” Banfield Capron’s Bible was, in 1817, in the possession of a
grandson, Abiel Brown, Esq., but it recorded nothing about the Cap-
rons except the time of the birth of Mr. Capron’s second child and
oldest daughter, Betsey, mother of Mr. Brown. The other records
formerly at the beginning or the end of the Bible had become loose
and were lost; so stated its owner in 1817 to Philip Capron, who
was shown the Bible, when he visited his cousin in Cumberland, Rhode
Island. In 1779, Philip Capron visited the house in Barrington where
his grandfather had lived. Banfield Capron was “of a middling stat-
ure, well-built, of a light complexion, blue eyes and reddish hair. He
held out to be a very smart, active and capable man in his old age to
do business.”

250

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Banfield Capron married (first) Elizabeth (or Emma) Callender,
who was born probably toward the North of England, near Wales,
and died most probably at Attleboro, after March n, 1708, daugh-
ter of John Callender, who lived in Rehoboth for a short time after
coming to America and then removed to New Hampshire, near the
location of Dartmouth College. He married (second) at Attle-
boro, Elizabeth Blackington, who died March or May 10, 1735,
daughter of Pentecost and Ann (Barrett) Blackington, from Marble-
head, Massachusetts. He married (third), December 16, 1735, Mrs.
Sarah (Norton) Daggett or Doggett. Children, all said to have been
of the first marriage (numbers three to eight on Swansea, Massachu-
setts, birth records as children of Banfield and Elizabeth Capron) : 1.
Banfield, Jr., born in 1682-83, died at Cumberland, Rhode Island,
August 16, 1763; married (first) Hannah Jencks; (second), Feb-
ruary 2, 1744-45, Sarah Brown, widow of Benjamin Brown, of Attle-
boro. 2. Betsey (Elizabeth) Banfield, born October 22, 1684; mar-
ried Captain John Brown. 3. John, born April 25, 1687, who was a
seafaring man, died at home, of fever; married, September 23, 1723,
Deborah Woodcock. 4. Hannah, born July 2, 1689, died February
17, 1732; married, in 1710, David Aldrich, of Mendon, Massachu-
setts. 5. Captain Joseph, of whom further. 6. Walter, born October
2, 1693, died about 1777; was a farmer and forgeman, settled in Gro-
ton, near New London, Connecticut; married Hope. 7. Mary, born
March 26, 1696, died July 6, 1780 ; married Captain Daniel Tyler, of
Attleboro. 8. Edward, born March 17, 1697-98; was a shoemaker
by trade; married (first), December 22, 1720, Mary Stanley. 9. A
daughter, who died young. 10. Margaret, died in June, 1793; mar-
ried, May 1 or 5, 1729, as his second wife, William Arnold, Esq., of
Smithfield, Rhode Island. 11. Jonathan, born in March, 1705-06,
was a farmer and lived with his father in Attleboro; married (first)
Rebecca Morse or Moses; (second), May 20, 1773, Abigail Robin-
son. 12. Sarah, born March 11, 1708-09; married Ralph Freeman,
of Attleboro. 13. (Possibly) Benjamin; the only mention of him is
in the Rehoboth Church Records, which records the baptisms of “Ben-
jamin and Jonathan, sons of Banfield Capron,” September 29, 1706.

(F. A. Holden: “Genealogy of the Descendants of Banfield Cap-
ron, 1660-1859,” pp. 1, 5, 6, 25, 146, 156, 16 1, 187, 191-92, 251-52.
E. W. Leavitt: “The Starkeys of New England and Allied Families,”

251

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

pp. 125-26, 131-32. James Savage: “A Genealogical Dictionary of the
First Settlers of New England,” Vol. I, p. 334. J. N. Arnold: “Vital
Records of Rehoboth, Massachusetts,” pp. 78,570. “Vital Records of
Attleboro, Massachusetts,” pp. 49, 57, 355, 644. J. H. Beers: “Rep-
resentative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,”
Vol. Ill, p. 1582. “New England Historical and Genealogical Reg-
ister,” Vol. XV, p. 790; Vol. XLVI, p. 145. “Swansea, Massachu-
setts, Records,” Book A, 1662-1705, Index of Births. J. Daggett:
“Sketch of the History of Attleboro, from Its First Settlement to the
Division,” pp. 89, 518.)

II. Captain Joseph Capron, son of Banfield and Elizabeth or
Emma (Callender) Capron, was born in Massachusetts, September
12, 1691, and died October 14, 1776, in his eighty-sixth year. He
“was a farmer and a man of repute in his day.” He is buried in “Old
Kirk” Cemetery, just in back of the Second Congregational Church
on Park Street in Attleboro.

Captain Joseph Capron married (first), June 3, 1714, Judith
Peck, who was born in 1690 and died March 14, 1734, daughter of
Hezekiah and Deborah (Cooper) Peck. She was buried in an old
graveyard opposite the house of Jonathan Peck, in Attleboro. Cap-
tain Joseph Capron married (second), February 14, 1735, Bethia
Burt, who died May 18, 1753. He married (third), November 12,
1753, Mary French, who died November 21, 1783. Children of first
marriage: 1. Amey, born July 15, 1715; married, in 1734, John

Starkey. 2. Diedema, born June 6, 1718, died July 29, 1783; mar-
ried, June 13, 1741, Bennajah Barrows, of Attleboro. 3. Judith, born
April 8, 1720, died young. 4. Joseph, Jr., born at Attleboro, Novem-
ber 1, 1722, died August 1, 1784; was a Revolutionary soldier; mar-
ried (first), July 3, 1745, Sarah Robeson; (second), March 6, 1762,
Sarah Foster. 5. Rhoda, born November 21, 1725; married Daniel
Stanley. Children of second marriage: 6. Judith, born May 19,

1737; married Caleb Eddy. 7. Hezekiah, born April 18, 1739. 8.

Ebenezer, born November 9, 1740, died three weeks later. 9. Elijah,
of whom further.

(F. A. Holden: “Genealogy of the Descendants of Banfield Cap-
ron, 1660-1859,” pp. 1 12-13, 135. J. Daggett: “Sketch of the His-
tory of Attleboro from Its First Settlement to the Division,” pp. 93,
519. “New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol.
XLVI, p. 146. “D. A. R. Lineage Books,” Vol. LX, p. 148. Ira B.

252

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Peck: “A Genealogical History of the Descendants of Joseph Peck,”
p. 134. M. P. Carter: “Gravestones and Church Records of Attle-
boro and Swansea, Massachusetts,” p. 26. J. H. Beers: “Represen-
tative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol.
Ill, p. 1582. “Vital Records of Attleboro, Massachusetts,” pp. 55,

56, 57, 58, 59, 357, 644-)

III. Elijah C apron, son of Captain Joseph and Bethia (Burt)
Capron, was born in Attleboro, Massachusetts, June 27, 1742, and
died there October 17, 1813. He served in the Revolutionary War,
as follows :

Elijah Capron, Attleborough, Sergeant, Capt. Stephen Richard-
son’s Co. of Minute Men, which marched on the alarm of April 19,
1775. Service 9 days, also order for wages at Attleborough, dated
July 5, 1776, for service on the alarm caused by the battle of Bunker
Hill; also on list of men in Captain Richardson’s Co. of Nov. 12,
Attleborough, serving in the 9th campaign in 1776; also 2d Lieuten-
ant, Capt. Alexander Foster’s (4th) Co., 4th Bristol Co. regt.; list of
officers of Massachusetts Militia; commissioned July 31, 1779, etc.,
etc., discharged August 8, 1780, service 10 days.

Elijah Capron married (intentions published May 11, 1769),
Abigail Stanley, of Attleboro, Massachusetts, born in 1742, died Feb-
ruary 1, 1826, “aged 84 years.” Children: 1. Lydia, born June 2,

1770; married Ephraim Dean. 2. Elijah (2), of whom further. 3.
Abigail, born December 1, 1774; married, April 6, 1797, Cyril Car-
penter. 4. Polly, born February 18, 1779; married Dr. Branch. 5.
David (twin), born November 15, 1781, died January 23, 1850;
married Polly Eaton. 6. Jonathan (twin) , born November 15, 1781,
died July 14, 1852; married Lucinda Richardson. 7. Jacob, born
April 5, 1784, died October 24, 1847; married Deborah Bates.

(J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old Families of South-
eastern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, p. 1582. F. A. Holden: “Gene-

alogy of the Descendants of Banfield Capron,” pp. 112, 135-36, 140-
142. “Massachusetts Soldiers and Sailors of the Revolution,” Vol.
Ill, p. 84. “Vital Records of Attleboro, Massachusetts,” pp. 55, 56,

57, 58? 59) 356, 643, 644. M. P. Carter: “Gravestones and Church
Records of Attleboro and Swansea, Massachusetts,” pp. no, 140.
“D. A. R. Lineage Books,” Vol. XXXIX, pp. 181-82.)

IV. Elijah (2) Capron, son of Elijah and Abigail (Stanley) Cap-
ron, was born June 7, 1772, and died April 2, 1848, “aged 75 years.”
He and his wife were buried in Attleboro, Massachusetts.

253

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Elijah (2) Capron married Lydia Sweet, born in 1777, died Janu-
ary 8, 1852, “aged 75 years.” Children: 1. Dennis, of whom fur-

ther. 2. Leprelet, born July 25, 1807; married, April 9, 1834 (inten-
tions published August 19, 1833), Candace Penie, of Rehoboth, Mas-
sachusetts. 3. Lydia, born October 30, 1809. 4. Nelson, born March
25, 1815.

(J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old Families of South-
eastern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, p. 1582. F. A. Holden: “Gene-

alogy of the Descendants of Banfield Capron,” p. 136. “Vital Rec-
ords of Attleboro, Massachusetts,” pp. 56, 58. “Vital Records of
Rehoboth, Massachusetts,” p. 78.)

V. Dennis Capron, son of Elijah (2) and Lydia (Sweet) Capron,
was born October 23, 1802, was baptized October 15, 1815, died at
Attleboro, Massachusetts, December 30, 1884, and was buried in
Woodlawn Cemetery. He lived in Attleboro, Massachusetts, where
he owned one hundred ten acres of land on County Street, most of
this property being improved. He was a successful farmer and won
the esteem of his community. His heirs gave to the town of Attle-
boro a tract, known as Capron Park, which was dedicated September
2, 1901. Mr. Capron was a Republican and took an active interest in
town affairs, but never sought public office.

Dennis Capron married Louisa Caroline Hodges. (Hodges VI.)
Children, last two born at Attleboro, Massachusetts: 1. Harford

Augustus, born at Norton, Massachusetts, October 10, 1828, living in
Attleboro in 1892; married, at Attleboro, March 21, 1850, Rhoda
Perry Thrasher, daughter of Simmons and Rhoda (Perry) Thrasher,
of Rehoboth, Massachusetts. 2. Eliza Jane, of whom further. 3.
Everett Sweet, born December 16, 1832; living in Attleboro in 1892;
married, at Whiting, Vermont, October 11, 1855, Arabella Adelia
Gibson, daughter of Levi Brown and Hulda (Bush) Gibson, of
Whiting.

(J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old Families of South-
eastern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, pp. 1582-84. “Vital Records of
Attleboro, Massachusetts,” pp. 56, 57, 459. A. D. Hodges: “Genea-
logical Record of the Hodges Family of New England,” p. 264.)

VI. Eliza Jane Capron, daughter of Dennis and Louisa Caroline
(Hodges) Capron, was born January 10, 1831, and was living in

254

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Attleboro in 1892. She married Shepard Wheaton Carpenter. (Car-
penter VIII.)

(J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old Families of South-
eastern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, pp. 1580-83. “Vital Records of
Attleboro, Massachusetts,” p. 56. A. D. Hodges: “Genealogical

Record of the Hodges Family of New England,” p. 264.)

(The Hodges Line)

Arms — Sable, three crescents or, on a canton gules a ducal crown of the second.

Crest — On a ducal coronet or, a crescent sable.

Motto — Sicut patribus sit Dens nobis. (Arms in possession of the family.)

The surname Hodges, frequently appearing as Hodge and Hodge-
son, is of English origin, from the nickname Hodge, from “the son of
Roger.” The “d” is intrusive as in Rodgers. During the reign of
Edward III, there was an Alice Hogges in County Somerset, and in
counties Norfolk and York the names of Johannes Hodgeson, Thomas
Hogge, Johannes, William and John Hoggeson are recorded in Eng-
land in 1379.

(C. W. Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

I. William Hodges, the American progenitor of the family, was
born in England and died in Taunton, Massachusetts, April 2, 1654.
The exact date that he came over from England is not known, nor is it
certain just where he first settled, but, in all probability, he was the
“William Hodges” who was appointed on the jury at the court held
in Salem, Massachusetts, March 27, 1638. The name is given as Wil-
liam Hedges in the Plymouth Colony records and as Hodges in the
Taunton records. In the beginning, Taunton was a part of Plymouth
Colony, and in all probability the Captain Hodges at Boston, in 1633,
who went by sea on excursions to Virginia and other places, but
stopped his sailing after he settled in Taunton, is this William Hodges,
who came, perhaps from Salem, to Taunton not long after the latter
place was bought by the first proprietors. His name is in the second
list of early Taunton settlers made out by the town clerk.

In August, 1643, he is listed among the males at Taunton between
the ages of sixteen and sixty, able to bear arms. He was propounded
freeman June 6, 1649, a°d admitted freeman, June 5, 1651, at
which time he was made constable at Taunton. On June 2, 1652, he
served on the Grand Jury and on a coroner’s jury August 2, 1653, at
Plymouth Court. He was an original stockholder of the first Taunton

255

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Iron Works and subscribed £20 for a whole share. Although fairly
young at the time of his death he appears to have owned much prop-
erty. The inventory of his estate is still on file at Plymouth. It was
taken and appraised by James Wyate, Oliver Purchis and William
Parker, May 15, 1654.

Mary (Andrews) Hodges, on March 15, 1654-55, testified to the
correctness of the inventory of her husband’s estate and executed a
deed of gift to her two children. To John she gave £30 with her
house, home-lot and all lands pertaining thereto. To Henry, her sec-
ond son, she gave £30 with a parcel of land given her by her father
and lying between the lots of her brother, Henry Andrews, and
John Cobb.

William Hodges married Mary Andrews, who was born about
1628-30, and died after 1700, daughter of Henry and Mary Andrews,
of Taunton, Massachusetts. Mary (Andrews) Hodges married (sec-
ond), in 1655, Peter Pitts, of Taunton, who died in 1692 or 1693,
and whose will was proved, January 12, 1692-93, with his widow as
executrix. They had six children. Children of William and Mary
(Andrews) Hodges: 1. John, born at Taunton, Massachusetts, in

1650, died there in 1719, between May 27 and October 1; married,
at Taunton, May 15, 1672, Elizabeth Macy, of that place. 2. Henry,
of whom further.

(Almon D. Hodges: “Genealogical Record of The Hodges Fam-
ily of New England,” pp. 71, 72, 73. J. H. Beers: “Representative
Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, p.
1584. New England Historic Genealogical Society: “Vital Records
of Taunton, Massachusetts,” Vol. II, p. 320. Charles H. Pope:
“Pioneers of Massachusetts,” p. 226. James Savage: “Genealogi-

cal Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England,” Vol. II, pp. 400,
440. Rufus Hodges: “Record of Hodges Families,” pp. 5-6. S. H.
Emery: “History of Taunton, Massachusetts,” pp. 89-90.)

II. Henry Hodges, son of William and Mary (Andrews) Hodges,
was born in Taunton, Massachusetts, in 1652, and died there, Sep-
tember 30, 1717. He resided in Taunton all his life, near his brother
John. His house was within a few yards of the place where a red
schoolhouse stood in 1820.

Henry Hodges took an active part in local affairs and became a
leading man in the settlement. He served as captain of the military

256

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

company, held the highest town offices for many years, and was a
deacon and presiding elder of the church, occupying, it is said, a seat
in the pulpit with Rev. Samuel Danforth. He acquired a large amount
of real estate, and his farm of “Crooked Meadow” at Burt’s Brook,
adjoining the boundary line of Norton and Taunton, is often referred
to in the records. He administered a large number of estates, and
because of his activity in land allotments it would seem he was prob-
ably a surveyor. On October 30, 1678, he served on a coroner’s jury
at court held at Plymouth, and on the Grand Jury, June 6, 1683. He
was appointed constable at Taunton in 1681; selectman for twenty-
eight years (1687-1701, 1703-09, 1711-16); member of the Town
Council for two years (1689, 1690) and represented Taunton in the
General Court for five years (1704, 1713, 1715, 1716 and 1717).

On April 8, 1682, his name was in the roster of the 3d squadron
of the military company ordered to bring arms to church on Sundays.
He was elected ensign of the 1st Military Company in March, 1690.
The second military company was organized previous to 1703. Henry
Hodges was the first captain of his company and retained command
until 1714. He subscribed to the fund for the Canadian Expedition
of 1690 under Sir William Phipps. Henry Hodges was buried in the
“Neck of Land Burying Ground,” where his gravestone bears the
inscription, “Here lies the body of Elder Henry Hodges. Died Sep-
tember 30, 1717 — aged 65 years.”

Henry Hodges married, at Taunton, December 17, 1674, Ester
Gallop, born July 21, 1653, the daughter of John Gallop, of Taunton,
Massachusetts. Children, born in Taunton: 1. Mary, born February

3, 1675-76, died probably in Mendon; married, about 1695, James
Keith. 2. Esther, born February 17, 1677-78, died February, 1760;
married Ichabod Southworth. 3. William, born March 18, 1679-80,
died February 12, 1768; married, July 29, 1708, Susannah Gilbert.

4. Charity, born April 5, 1682, died February 28, 1739; married
(first), March 25, 1702-03, Elkanah Leonard; (second), December
17, 1722, Jabez Perkins. 5. John, of whom further. 6. Henry, born
in 1685 or 1686, died September 18, 1755; married, April 5, 1711,
Sarah Leonard. 7. Joseph, born in 1688 or 1689, died in 1745 ; mar-
ried (first), March 11, 1712-13, Bethiah Williams; (second), Octo-
ber 26, 1738, Mary (Toogood-Kent) Barney. 8. Benjamin, born
about 1691, died in November, 1754; married (first), about 1719,

257

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Abiah Deane; (second), May 27, 1749, Sarah (Lane) Silley, widow
of Benjamin Silley. 9. Ephraim, born about 1693, died at Mansfield,
Connecticut, March 4, 1772; married, January 21, 1731, Bethiah
Danforth. 10. Elizabeth. 11. Abigail.

(Almon D. Hodges: “Genealogical Record of the Hodges Fam-
ily of New England,” pp. 71, 75, 76, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87, 88. “The
New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol. LIV, p. 89.
J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old Families of Southeast-

ern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, p. 1 584. New England Historic Genea-
logical Society: “Vital Records of Taunton, Massachusetts,” Vol. I,
pp. 215-16-17; Vol. II, p. 250; Vol. Ill, p. 106.)

III. John Hodges , son of Henry and Ester (Gallop) Hodges,
was born in Taunton, Massachusetts, in 1684, and died in Norton,
Massachusetts, in 1759, aged seventy-five years. He lived on the
“Crooked Meadow” farm in the southern part of Norton, where
were also his son, Andrew Hodges, and grandson, Rufus Hodges. In
his youth John Hodges was injured so that his limbs were crippled all
his life. He was called “Junior” in the town records to distinguish
him from his older cousin, John Hodges, called “Senior.”

John Hodges married Hannah Morton. (Morton IV.) Chil-
dren, born in Norton, Massachusetts: 1. Elizabeth, born November

24, 1724, died in infancy. 2. Peter, born September 13, 1727, died
young. 3. Andrew, of whom further.

(Almon D. Hodges: “Genealogical Record of The Hodges Fam-
ily of New England,” p. 84.)

IV. Andrew Hodges, son of John and Hannah (Morton) Hodges,
was born at Norton, Massachusetts, in 1729 or 1730, and died there
in January, 1777, aged forty-seven. He settled at the “Crooked
Meadow” at Norton, on the homestead of his father, and later the
home of his son, Rufus Hodges.

Although it is known that Andrew Hodges served in the French
and Indian Wars, details of his service have been lost. He was ser-
geant of the detail from the 3d Bristol County Regiment, ordered
August 11, 1751, to march and report to Lieutenant-General William
Pepperell, on news of the attack on Fort William Henry, New York,
by the French and Indians. Andrew Hodges was second lieutenant
of the 2d Troop of Horse, 3d Bristol County Regiment, in July, 1771.

258

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

A strong supporter of the cause of the Colonies, he was, in 1776,
elected on the Norton Committee of Correspondence and Inspection.

Andrew Hodges married (first) Mehitable Leonard, born at
Taunton, died at Norton, about 1770, daughter of James and Mehita-
ble (Phillips) Leonard. Andrew Hodges married (second), inten-
tions published May 17, 1773, Abigail Hoskins, born at Middleboro,
Massachusetts, in 1741, died at Newport, Rhode Island, October 24,
1824, daughter of Samuel and Joanna (Harvey) Hoskins. She mar-
ried (second) James Taylor, of Newport, Rhode Island. Children
of the first marriage, born in Norton, Massachusetts: 1. Hannah,

born in 1753 or 1754, died March 5, 1811; married, in 1784, Job
Tisdale. 2. John, born probably about 1751, or between that date
and 1756, died in New York City in the Revolutionary Army, July
28, 1776, unmarried. 3. Rufus, born March 1, 1759, died at Nor-
ton, July 15, 1841, unmarried. 4. Andrew, born probably in 1761,
died at Captain James Leonard’s home May 9, 1779, unmarried. 5.
Sibyl, born November 12, 1762, died March 23, 1842; married, in
1782, Rufus Clapp. 6. Mehitable, born November 15, 1766, died
October 4, 1853; married, January 17, 1787, Ebenezer Hall. 7.
Zilpha, born in November, 1769, died February 27, 1853; married,
November 29, 1792, Luther Short. Child of the second marriage:
8. Leonard, of whom further.

(Almon D. Hodges: “Genealogical Record of The Hodges Fam-
ily of New England,” pp. 84, 116, 1 1 7, 168-69. J- H. Beers: “Rep-
resentative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,”
Vol. Ill, p. 1584.)

V. Leonard Hodges, son of Andrew and Abigail (Hoskins)
Hodges, was born at Norton, Massachusetts, March 13, 1774, and
died there March 7, 1841. He accompanied his mother to Newport,
Rhode Island, after her second marriage and until he was fourteen
years old stayed there, attending the school of Master Goddard,
whom he described as “an excellent teacher.” He removed to his
brother Rufus’ house at Crooked Meadow, Norton. He became an
apprentice to Ichabod Perry, of Norton, in the trade of carpenter and
wheelwright, and at the age of twenty-one followed this trade a fewr
years at Williamstown, Massachusetts. About the time of his mar-
riage he returned to Norton and settled on the old homestead, continu-
ing his trade in addition to farming.

259

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Leonard Hodges built the Norton Academy, the Free Masons’
Hall, and the Major White homestead, the latter in 1810, also the
Talbot factory, and many other structures. He was a Democrat of
the old school, and a loyal Methodist in his religion. He has been
characterized as modest, energetic, and strictly honest.

Leonard Hodges married, at Taunton, Massachusetts, March 13,
1798, Hannah Peck. (Peck VI.) Children, born at Norton, Mas-
sachusetts: 1. Rufus, born April 12, 1799, died at Cincinnati, Ohio,

January 8, 1845. 2- Leonard, born February 27, 1801, died at Nor-
ton, May 27, 1877; married, November 26, 1824, Chloe Lane. 3.
Hannah Peck, born June 15, 1803, died July 25, 1885; married, Sep-
tember 12, 1824, Asa Arnold, born August 10, 1797, died August
29, 1871. 4. Abby Ann, born December 15, 1805, died August 10,

1881; married, November 22, 1836, Joseph Dana Sweet, born Feb-
ruary 17, 1803, died January 11, 1889. 5. Louisa Caroline, of whom
further. 6. Lewis (twin), born August 9, 1810, died October 15,
1837; married, August 9, 1832, Sally B. Round, born May 9, 1809,
died August 29, 1865. 7. Earl (twin), born August 9, 1810, died

April 3, 1857; married, April 22, 1831, Harriet Lane, born July 10,
1807, died May 27, 1894. 8. Lepha Miranda, born March 19, 1813,
died December 2, 1894; married, May 10, 1832, Samuel Seaver, born
June 10, 1808, died July 3, 1884. 9. Andrew James, born October

31, 1815, died October 9, 1900; married, August 1, 1844, Sarah
Elizabeth Grant, born October 16, 1821. 10. Royal Peck, born

August 1, 1818, died at Norton, in August, 1893; married (first),
September 9, 1846, Martha Maria Leonard, born May 20, 1816, died
April 29, 1864; married (second), April 3, 1865, Henrietta Cath-
erine Palmer, born March 5, 1835. 11. Lydia Taylor, born Decem-

ber 16, 1820, died January 26, 1895 ; she was a resident of Wellesley,
Massachusetts, in 1894; married, at Norton, March 26, 1851, Ben-
jamin Caswell, born October 20, 1805, died January 18, 1874.

(Almon D. Hodges: “Genealogical Record of The Hodges Fam-
ily of New England,” pp. 116, 170, 262-67. J. H. Beers: “Repre-
sentative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol.
Ill, p. 1585. New England Historic Genealogical Society: “Vital

Records of Taunton, Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 216; Vol. II, p. 250.
“Descendants of Leonard and Hannah Hodges,” pp. 5-6.)

VI. Louisa Caroline Hodges, daughter of Leonard and Hannah
(Peck) Hodges, was born in Norton, Massachusetts, May 18, 1808,

260

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

where she resided until she removed to Attleboro, Massachusetts,
where she died March 1 8, 1879. She married Dennis Capron. (Cap-
ron V.)

(Almon D. Hodges: “Genealogical Records of The Hodges

Family in New England,” p. 263. The Essex Institute, Salem, Mas-
sachusetts: “Vital Records of Attleboro, Massachusetts,” pp. 56,

459-)

(The Peck Line)

Arms — Argent, on a chevron gules three crosses formee of the field.

Crest — Two lances or in saltire headed argent pennons hanging to them or, each charged
with a cross formee gules, the spears entiled with a chaplet vert.

Motto — Crux Christi solus mea.

(Crozier: “General Armory.” Bolton: “American Armory.”)

Peck is a surname of great antiquity, going back to an early date
in England. It was originally adopted by those persons living at “the
peck,” that is, the hilltop. It has been found as del Pek, Pek, Peeke,
del Peeke, etc., in very early records.

(Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

(The Family in England)

I. Robert Peck, second son of Robert Peck, the elder, resided in
Beccles, County Suffolk, England. He was born prior to May 28,
1547, when he was named legatee in the will of his maternal grand-
father, John Waters, the elder, of Beccles.

Robert Peck died between March 22, 1592-93, when his will was
dated, and November 10, 1598, when it was proved at Beccles.

The will of Robert Peck, of Beccles, County Suffolk, dated 22
March, 1592:

I, Robert Peck of Beccles, county Suffolk, whole of mind and per-
fect of remembrance, although sick and weak of body at Chelmsford,
county Essex, at this present, of a pleurisy (both real and personal),
with appurtenances, as follows :

My body to be buried where it shall please God to call me. To
Helen, my well-loved wife, (in consideration of the payment of my
debts, the bringing up of my children, and the finishing of the houses
which I am now building.) I give all my houses, lands, tenements,
etc., as well freehold as copyhold, and all my leases, plate, goods and
chattels within the town of Beccles, Barsham, Ingate, or elsewhere,
with the appurtenances — to the said Helen or her assigns during her
natural life, in consideration of the things above-mentioned and also

261

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

of paying such legacies to my children as I shall appoint, or leave to
her goodly consideration to provide for them according to her ability.

I give unto her (Helen) full authority to sell my woods in Bar-
sham or my meadows in Barsham or both, if necessary. I desire my
very good friends, Mr. Bartholomew Stiles and Mr. John Talbot, to
aid my wife with their good counsel about the execution of this, my
last will and testament.

To Richard Peck, my son, all my houses wherein I dwell in Bliber-
gate (Balligate) Street, my close at Ingate Church, and my “pightill”
in the same field — to him and his heirs for ever, and also all the lease
lands adjoining the said close during the numbers of years yet to
come, if his mother will vouchsafe him such favor, on condition that
he pay such legacies as his mother shall appoint him to do.

Whereas Thomas Peck, my brother, deceased, by his last will gave
unto the said Richard, my son, two tenements in Balligate Street,
lately burnt, one of which has been built again on the same ground and
the other on part of the said ground and on part of other freeground
which I purchased of my uncle, William Waters, I will that the said
Richard, my son, within one month after he shall become twenty-one
years of age he shall make over an estate in fee simple to such of my
sons and their heirs to whom I shall hereafter bequeath the said
tenements, and also surrender my copyhold if it come to his hands.
And if my son Richard shall not perform these things, he shall lose the
benefit of such houses, lands, and leases as I have before assigned to
him, and the same shall be (i. e. shall go) to those of my two sons to
whom I shall give the forsaid new tenements and to their heirs and
assigns forever.

To Nicholas Peck, my son, my new tenement, partly builded on
the tenement late of William Waters, and my meadows lying in Bar-
sham (if his mother will spare the said meadows) to him, the said
Nicholas, and his heirs for ever, he paying out the same such sums
of money as his Mother shall assign him. to do.

To Samuel Peck, my son, the other new tenement and little copy-
hold yard — to him and his heirs forever — he paying out thereof to
such of his brothers and sisters such money as his Mother shall assign
him to do.

If, for paying my debts, bringing up my children, finding my son
Robert at Cambridge, and providing legacies for my two daughters
and my son Joseph my said wife shall make a lease of all or any part
of my said lands and tenements, the same shall continue for so many
years as she shall lease the same, her death or any legacies whatsoever
before given or appointed to the contrary notwithstanding.

The residue of all my goods and chattels I give wholly to the said
Helen, my wife, whom I make my sole executrix, desiring her to have

262

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

care of those my children whose legacies I have left to her considera-
tion, and also of Joane Babb and Elizabeth Babb and Robert Merri-
man and my sister Note (Nott) as she may.

Supervisors: Mr. Bartholomew Stiles, clerk, Mr. Roger Peirson,
and Mr. John Talbot, whom I desire to aid my wife with their best
counsel and advice.

Written with my own hand the day and year above said. By me

(signed) Robert Peck.

Robert Peck married Helen (or Ellen) Babbs, daughter of
Nicholas Babbs, of Guilford, County Surrey, England. She sur-
vived him and as “Ellenor Peeke Widowe” was buried at Beccles,
October 31, 1614. Children of Robert and Helen (Babbs) Peck
were: 1. Richard, born about 1574, died in 1615, without isue. 2.

Nicholas, born about 157 6; married at Yarmouth, England, Febru-
ary 19, 1610, Rachel Young. 3. Rev. Robert, born about 1580, died
in Hingham, England, in 1656; came to America in 1638, returning
to England in 1641 to preach again in his old parish at Hingham,
County Norfolk, as rector of St. Andrew’s Church there; married
(first), Anne, who died in Hingham, England; (second), Martha
Bacon. 4. Joseph, of whom further. 5. Samuel. 6. Margaret. 7.
Martha.

(“The New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol.
XC, p. 373; Vol. CXI, pp. 282-86. “Visitation of Suffolk, 1664-1668
in the Harleian Society Publications,” Vol. LXI. G. Lincoln: “His-
tory of Hingham, Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, p. 107.)

(The Family in America)

I. Joseph Peck, son of Robert and Ellen (Babbs) Peck, was born
at Beccles, County Suffolk, England, in 1587, and died at Seekonk,
Massachusetts, December 23, 1683. In 1638 he came from England
with his wife, three sons, a daughter, two men servants, and three
maid servants. They were from Hingham and arrived in the ship
“Diligent” of Ipswich, John Martin, master. Joseph Peck and his
brother Robert had grants of land adjoining each other in Hing-
ham, Massachusetts; Joseph’s grant being of seven acres. He was
a man of prominence and holder of many important offices, namely:
representative to the General Court, selectman, justice of the peace,
assessor, keeper of the records. In 1641 he bought lands in Seekonk
and moved there in 1645. At the time of his removal a fire burned

263

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

some of his horses and other property amounting to £50. At Seekonk
Joseph Peck was active in town affairs and was one of the wealthiest
proprietors. His will follows:

Know all men by these presents that I, Joseph Peck, Senr., of
Rehoboth, so ordain and make this my last will and testament in man-
ner and form following:

Item — I give and bequeath unto my son Joseph all my
lands and meadows lying and being near unto the River called
Palmers River to him and his heirs forever.

Item — I give unto him my old black mare and my great
chist in the parlor.

Item — I give unto my son John my house and lands which
I purchased of John Torry and the half of the meadow
betwixt Mr. Newman and me on the other side of the new
meadow river to him and his heirs forever. Also, I give unto
him my great chist in the hall.

Item — I give and bequeath unto my son Nicholas all my
meadow at the hundred acres and the meadow called bushey
meadow and all my meadows on the north side of town to him
and his heirs forever.

Item — I give and bequeath unto my son Samuell my
house where I now dwell with all my houses standing there.

The outyards and all my house lott and all my land in the
second division and my Plaine lotts excepting half my furthest
which I give unto him my meadow called cheesbrook meadow
and also my salt marsh att broad cove To him and his heirs
forever.

Item — I give unto my sons Nathaneil and Israel all my
lands which I purchased of John Adams and Mr. Bradford
with the meadow called the long beach which is betwixt John
Allin and mee; and also my meadow at Papasquash betwixt
John Allin and me to them and their heirs forever.

Item — I give my use of the meadow att Kekumeutt unto
John Peeke my son and also my lands att Waxkamauquate I
give unto my sonnes Joseph and Nicholas divided betwixt them.

Item — I give and bequeath unto my Daughter Hubbert
thirty pounds in such pay as can be raised out of the goods I
shall leave to be paid by my Executors within one year after
my decease and also give unto her my wifes best cloak and one
fine pillowbeer and my Damask napkin.

Item — I give unto my son Samuell my silver beaker and
two silver spoons and one gould Ringe which was his mother’s

264

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

and also one pair of fine holland sheets and one Diaper Table-
cloth and six Diaper Napkins 2 fine pillow bears and the
feather bed and bolster and pillow and two Blankets whereon
I now lye my second Rugg with some other small linenne in
my Trunk in the parlor which I also give to him and other chist
under the window in the parlor and my best curtains and cur-
tain rodds.

Item — I give unto my son Nathaniel my biggest silver
cupp and gould Ringe two silver spoons my best feather bed
one bolster two blankets the rug that now lyeth upon mee my
trunk in the parlour chamber my round table three diaper
napkins one long table cloth betwixt Irrael and him.

Item — I give unto Israel my son my silver salt 2 silver
spoons two bed teekes with the bolster the olde flocke bed two
blankets my best coverlid one bolster one pillow two pillow-
bears also unto Nathaniel one pillow two pillowbearers.

Item — I give Irrael my son ten of my best ewes and my
sorrelled mare two of my best cows and my bull and my segg
and three Diaper napkins.

Item — I give unto my son Joseph five ewes and to my son
Samuel my two oxen called Bucke and Duke and two cowes
and one of my little Blowes one chaine with the copses for the
cart and I give unto Nathaniel two steeres and two cows.

Item — I give unto my son Nicholas the feather bed which
he hath allready and my best Rugg and unto my son John I
give the feather bed and bolster which he hath allready and
40s to buy him a rugg and to Israel I give the two little chists
in the chamber and his mothers little trunke and unto my son
Samuell I give my Bedstead in the Parlor chamber.

Item — I give unto my son Joseph my goulde Ringe and
unto John and Nicholas my two silver wine cupps — My mind
is that my three younger sonnes should each have three plat-
ters and all the rest my pewter should be equally between my
six sonnes and all my apparrell I give unto my three elder
sonnes and all my wifes apparrell I give unto my three young-
est sons to be divided, betwixt them.

I give and bequeath all the rest of my goods cattles and chattels
my debts and legacies being paid and my body brought to the grave
unto my six sonnes equally to be divided amongst them the youngest
and weakest to have as good a share as the eldest and strongest desir-
ing Mr. Newman and my brother Thomas Cooper to be the super-
visors of this my last will and testament, and I do ordane my son
Nicholas and my son Samuell the Executors of this my last will desir-

2 65

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

ing the Lord to guide their hartes to do all according unto my intent
heer seet down.

The last will and testament of mee Joseph Peeke written with
my own hand.

A further Amply fication of our fathers will upon his death bed,
which was not expressed in his will.

Item — hee gave to his Joseph half his meadow that he
purchased of Mr. Bradford lying on the further side of the
new Meadow River; to his son John thirty five pounds of
comon; to his son Samuell two hundred fifty pounds of comon
to his son Nathaniel two hundred pounds of comon. These
gifts were given them and their heirs forever. Moreover our
father added to his daughter hibbert ten more pounds than
sett down in his written will.

Item — That Nathaniel and Israel shall have equal shares
of the corn that shall be raised upon that grounds which he
hath given his son, Samuel for this year ensuing they bestow-
ing an equal share of labor with them upon the land. It was
further expressed by him that seeing those oxen expressed
his will that was given to his three younger sons was disposed
of before his death that are coming on in their rooms should
be made choice of by them in manor as followeth his son
Samuel first choosing his son Israel next and Nathaniel last.

It was his will also that those two mares which were given to
his sonne Joseph five sheep and Israel ten they also being sold
before our father’s death wee have agreed that they shall have
a valuation as they were sold which was nine shillings apiece.

This we own to be our father’s will expressed to him unto us
when he was in perfect memory which we owne as his proper will
and desire.

In witness whereof wee sett to our hands —

Witness whereof:

Stephen Paine John Pecke

Thomas Cooper Samuel Pecke

John Reed Nathaniel Pecke

Joseph Pecke Israel Peck.

Joseph Peck married (first), May 21, 1617, Rebecca Clark,
who died in Hingham, England, and was buried there on October 24,
1 637. Joseph Peck married a second time, a wife whose name is
unknown.

Children of the first marriage (all baptized in Hingham, Eng-
land) : 1. Anna, baptized March 12, 1617-18, buried in Hingham,

266

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

July 27, 1636. 2. Rebecca, baptized May 25, 1620; married Mr.

Hubbert. 3. Joseph, of whom further. 4. John, born about 1626;
married (first) a wife whose name is not known. She died in 1677
and he married (second) Elizabeth, died in 1687, and (third)
Rebecca. 5. Nicholas, baptized April 9, 1630, died May 27, 1710;
married (first) Mary Winchester; (second) Rebecca, who died
November 2, 1704. Children of the second marriage (baptized in
Hingham, Massachusetts) : 6. Samuel, baptized February 3, 1638-

1639, died June 9, 1736; married (first), June 1, 1666, Sarah Hunt,
who died in 1673; married (second), November 21, 1677, Rebecca
(Paine) Hunt. 7. Nathaniel, baptized October 31, 1641, married
Deliverance, who was buried on May 1, 1675. He was buried August
12, 1676. 8. Israel, baptized March 4, 1644, died September 2,

r 7 2 3 ; married Betha Bosworth.

(I. B. Peck: “A Genealogical History of the Descendants of

Joseph Peck,” pp. 13-17, 29, 122-23, 200, 203, 245. J. N. Arnold:
“Vital Records of Rehoboth,” pp. 282, 283. G. Lincoln: “History
of Hingham, Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, p. 108.)

II. Joseph (2) Peck, eldest son of Joseph and Rebecca (Clark)
Peck, was baptized at Hingham, County Norfolk, in England, August
23, 1623. His will was dated at Rehoboth, Massachusetts, July 5,
1697. A codicil was dated March 11, 1701. In his will he names
first his daughter Patience, wife of Richard Bowen, and to her and
her heirs bequeaths twenty acres and twenty pounds. He also names
his other children.

Joseph Peck, Jr., came with his father to New England in 1638,
and was in Hingham, Massachusetts, until the family removed to
Seekonk in 1645. There he settled near his father on what is known
as Seekonk Plain. In 1655 he was on town records — one of a com-
mittee to levy a tax for the minister’s maintenance. In 1661 he was
appointed to view the damage in the Indians’ corn and give notice to
the town concerning it. He was among those who advanced money
for carrying on King Philip’s War. About 1660 he left Seekonk
Plain to live on Palmer’s River in the Southwestern part of the town
of Rehoboth. The sale of his first property appears on date of July
15, 1665, when he deeded to Thomas Cooper, his house, orchards,
yards and home lot, containing twelve acres, besides certain common-
age and rights, the said Cooper not to occupy the lands until Joseph

267

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Peck had gathered and carried away his corn. Joseph Peck had land
from his father, bought other portions and in time had acquired a
large amount.

Joseph Peck married Hannah. Their children were all born in
Rehoboth, Massachusetts. Children: i. Rebecca, born November 6,

1650. 2. Hannah, born March 25, 1653; married, August 20, 1677,
Daniel Reed. 3. Elizabeth, born November 26, 1657; married, as
his second wife, Major Samuel Mason, of Stonington. 4. Jathniel,
of whom further. 5. Mary, born November 17, 1662; married Feb-
ruary 4, 1690-91, Benjamin Hunt. 6. Ichabod, born September 13,
1666; died about 1690 on Anticosti Island during the Old French
War in the William Phips Expedition to Canada. 7. Patience, born
October 11, 1669, and died at Rehoboth, Massachusetts, August 21,
1746; married Richard Bowen, Jr. 8. Captain Samuel, born Octo-
ber 11, 1672; died June 9, 1736; married Rachel.

(Ira B. Peck: “A Genealogical History of the Descendants of

Joseph Peck,” pp. 14, 29-33, 35. J. N. Arnold: “Vital Records of
Rehoboth, Massachusetts,” pp. 283, 703.)

III. Jathniel Peck , son of Joseph (2) and Hannah Peck, was
born July 24, 1660, and died April 5, 1742. He established a home
near that of his father in Rehoboth, Massachusetts. He became
wealthy and influential. He represented his district at the Massa-
chusetts General Court in the years 1721-23 and 1726-31. He was
active in church affairs and assisted in organizing the church at
Palmers River. He and Captain Peck each gave an acre of land for
the site on the hill, and became members; there being only ten at
first. The deeds for the land which Jathniel Peck gave his children
may be found in the records of Taunton, Massachusetts. Jathniel
Peck and his wife were buried in the graveyard at Palmers River
Church.

Jathniel Peck married, February 28, 1688-89, Sarah Smith, who
was born in 1670 and died June 4, 1717. Children: 1. Daniel, born

January 30, 1689-90, died November 6, 1750; married Sarah Paine.
2. Ichabod, born March 9, 1690-91, died July 8, 1773 ; married Judith
Paine. 3. Solomon, born September 20, 1692, died, unmarried,
December, 1728. 4. Esther, born April 30, 1694, believed to have
died February, 1729-30. 5. Jathniel, born September 10, 1695, his

estate was administered October 28, 1739; married, October 19,

268

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

1719, the widow, Damaris Hunt. 6. Ebenezer, born September 20,
1697, baptized June 14, 1699, will dated August 6, 1760; married,
August 12, 1724. 7. Sarah, born March 1, 1698-99. 8. Rebecka,

born October 10, 1700, baptized May 25, 1701. 9. Joseph, born

April 18, 1702, baptized June 14, 1702, died and estate administered
before March 21, 1737; probably married Mary Bliss. 10. Ann,
born April 7, 1704, baptized May 28, 1704. 11. Benjamin, born

January 18, 1705-06. 12. Elizabeth, born October 31, 1707, bap-
tized April 17, 1709. 13. Henry, of whom further. 14. Nathaniel,

born September 14, 1712, died about 1762; married Marcy.

(J. N. Arnold: “Vital Records of Rehoboth, Massachusetts,”

pp. 289, 704. I. B. Peck: “A General History of the Descendants

of Joseph Peck,” pp. 33-34, 37-44. “New England Historical and
Genealogical Register,” Vol. XV, pp. 67, 69-71.)

IF. Henry Peck, son of Jathniel and Sarah (Smith) Peck, was
born December 7, 1709, and died in Rehoboth, Massachusetts. He
lived in Rehoboth all of his life near what is now known as the “Vil-
lage” and also upon the farm later occupied by the widow Hannah
Allen in 1863. The following record is of his military service:

Henry Peck, Rehoboth, Private, Captain Stephen Bullock’s Co.,
Col. Thomas Carpenter’s (Bristol Co.) Regiment, entered service
July 27, 1778; discharged September 10, 1778. Service 1 mo., 16
days on expedition to Rhode Island.

Henry Peck married Rachel Whitaker, who died at the home of
her son Solomon in Royalston, Massachusetts, aged ninety-three years.
Children: 1. John, born February 4, 1734-35, died at Montpelier,

Vermont, March 4, 1812; married Mary Drown. 2. Henry, born
February 28, 1737-38; married, April 25, 1765, Naomi Peck. 3.
Rebekah, born February 11, 1739-40. 4. Daniel (twin), born May

17, 1741, died at Royalston, Massachusetts, in 1814; married,
November 7, 1771, Relief Jay. 5. Benjamin (twin), born May 17,
1741. 6. Oliver, died young. 7. Rachel, born February 12, 1744-45.
8. Lydia, born September 16, 1747, died young. 9. Solomon, born
October 3, 1749, died November 14, 1822; married, July, 1772,
Anna Wheeler. 10. Oliver, of whom further. 11. Lydia, born Feb-
ruary 1, 1755.

(J. N. Arnold: “Vital Records of Rehoboth, Massachusetts,” pp.
284, 704, 706. “Massachusetts Soldiers and Sailors of the Revolu-

269

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

tionary War,” Vol. XII, p. 47. I. B. Peck: “A Genealogical His-

tory of the Descendants of Joseph Peck,” pp. 43-44, 50-52.)

V. Oliver Peck, son of Henry and Rachel (Whitaker) Peck, was
born February 26, 1751-52, and died in Rehoboth, Massachusetts,
January 26, 1839. He lived in the northern part of Rehoboth, and
was a farmer of comfortable means. The record of his war service is
as follows :

Oliver Peck of Rehoboth, Massachusetts, Private. Capt. Samuel
Bliss Co. of Minute Men which marched on the alarm of April 19,
1775; service to April 27, 1775. Also Lieutenant John Dryer’s Co.,
Col. Thomas Carpenter’s regiment, service eleven days; company
marched from Rehoboth, to Bristol, Rhode Island on the alarm of
December 8, 1776; also, Capt. Sylvannus Martin’s Co., Col. Wil-
liam’s regiment, service from September 29, 1777 to October 30, 1777
at Tiverton.

Oliver Peck married, October 3, 1774, service performed by Rev.
Robert Rogerson, Hannah Bliss, who died March 14, 1837. Chil-
dren: 1. Darius, born January 20, 1776; left no family. 2. Hannah,
of whom further. 3. Lepha, born January 23, 1781, died September
2, 1792. 4. Oliver, born February 9, 1784, still living in i860; mar-
ried, April 24, 1808, Nancy Macomber. 5. Rufus, born June 17,
1786, died in New Providence, Clark County, Indiana, August 6,
1826; married, April 6, 1812, Naomi Alexander. 6. Caleb, born
January 10, 1789, living in i860; married Polly Jacobs. 7. Samuel,
born November 24, 1791, died in Texas, June 13, 1843; married,
April 20, 1820, Malinda Hide. 8. Royal, born May 11, 1794, died
April 29, 1815; unmarried. 9. Lepha, born December 13, 1797; mar-
ried, April 6, 1820, Zeba Bliss.

(I. B. Peck: “A History of the Descendants of Joseph Peck,”

pp. 44, 52, 53, 72. J. N. Arnold: “Vital Records of Rehoboth, Mas-
sachusetts,” pp. 286, 290. Rev. George Tilton: “A History of Reho-
both, Massachusetts,” p. 123. “Massachusetts Soldiers and Sailors
of the Revolutionary War,” Vol. XII, p. 52.)

VI. Hannah Peck, daughter of Oliver and Hannah (Bliss) Peck,
was born at Rehoboth, Massachusetts, June 5, 1778, and died at
Taunton, Massachusetts, July 13, 1857.

Hannah Peck married Leonard Hodges. (Hodges V.)

(J. N. Arnold: “Vital Records of Rehoboth, Massachusetts,” p.
290.)

270

RING

Arms — Argent, on a bend gules, three crescents of the first.

Crest — A hand vested sable cuffed or, holding a roll of paper.

(Burke: “General Armory.” Clark L. Ring: “A His-
tory of the Ring Family, 1631-1928.”)

ALLERTON

Arms — Argent, a chevron between three lions’ heads erased sable.
Crest — A lion’s head erased collared.

(Matthews: “American Armoury.” Burke: “General
Armory.”)

PECK

Argent, on a chevron gules three crosses formee of the field.
Two lances or in saltire headed argent pennons hanging to
them or, each charged with a cross formee gules, the spears
ehfiled with a chaplet vert.

-Crux Christi salus mea.

•. (Crozier: “General Armory.” Bolton: “American

Armory.”)

MORTON

Arms— Quarterly, gules and ermine, in sinister chief and dexter base
a goat’s head, erased argent, attired or.

(Crozier: “General Armory.” Burke: “General

Armory.”)

Arms —
Crest —

Motto—

-U 7,"

.r.r!

r;1 ES&

:Sffi

:D.miC

Vfofri>7i

yvOT5i ON’

■ ‘ 1 • £)Vtla t£»\( . '■ ■

yfi:-- bxisdl Jt.-iio '4

: 1 f.j i ;■ «'7hl:7ti \TFr.b;7iErv.a) Ir7 t > j i ^ >yh>v • ' ..7—- U»;«7V

..1 J" dsrm'-Sl; .7 "'• :~ji%

(" l .■■(-■i-i ' ;o : .v?7ns^ V7 ; '."■•■ ■ 7"*

br.-s-sif»-...8bj:54 Uiu : ! Ys -S r&> f: .-: . •• YJ^d/fiD'V ^kr-S /;-• >.S$rd\'7

, m. Tio'pht^ ' ■< » bi ?,7t-u /. — U'mO “

' 7t(8 ' .VTrro1;. / n^wu fi’A” :vY" lldM; ^ 7^-7^

‘("-7/nfmA • *?"

»". HI

"■'JS '■>•*' -n> t

h bf,' /{i ! ? ' t'i 83 j ij{ o-tf l — — ’ \/”VJ ' '.'

' r -• ^ rT &a A j -

i*nv IS! i* dr*/ ->i us < ^ sfgW^f; y*

.u .1 . ■'O -b.ttoV* t

ti’X'- . ' 7> ’ : 1>VY' "*.. •.7 vV;‘ /

"iuidsYi ' '• : rt Id ;r-i ,($;n«uv bqe

.1,' b-f -J. .V ■' ' *>*} S , f fMd

. ri'^l ' M „ f'T ' . 0^.’ ■ ■ i »*\Or ) JL • . <" 4

- M-i&sSS ;<;•

• •* . v U ‘ ' * ': ,

■ **!,- v *• >;

forfeit

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

(The Morton Line)

Arms — Quarterly, gules and ermine, in sinister chief and dexter base a goat’s head, erased
argent, attired or.

(Crozier: “General Armory.” Burke: “General Armory.”)

The surname Morton, Moreton, and Mortaigne, is of very ancient
origin, having been found in old Dauphine. However, it is still extant
in France today. In 1273 we find written records in several counties
of England thus proving the early popularity of the surname in Eng-
land also. It is a surname of locality, moor-ton, meaning a farm or
enclosure on the moor. Alicia de Morton, among those recorded in
1273, was of Yorkshire County. It is this county in which the first
of the Morton family of our concern was located.

(Bardsley: “A Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

I. George Morton , first of the name to establish a family in
America, was born about 1585 at Austerfield, Yorkshire, England,
and it is believed that he was of the ancient family of Morton. He
may be the hitherto unaccounted for George, son of Anthony Mor-
ton, of Bawtry. This historic family, although of Romanist lineage,
departed from family tradition and joined the Protestant Puritans and
Separatists.

No record of George Morton of this line has been found for the
early days of his life. His home was in Yorkshire in the vicinage of
Scrooby Manor so it is possible that he was a member of Brewster’s
historic church. It is definitely known that he joined the Pilgrims at
Leyden, Holland, and remained one of their company until his
death. He is said to have been a merchant. His chief claim to promi-
nence in the history of his days is in the role of publisher of a journal
which he issued in London in 1622. It was known as “Mourt’s Rela-
tion,” which has been called the first history of New England.

Not long after this journal was given to the public, George Mor-
ton sailed for America in the ship “Ann,” reaching Plymouth in June,
1623. He died just one year later, in June, 1624, and his body rests
at Burial Hill, Plymouth, Massachusetts. He was considered an
exemplary Christian and will be remembered as one of the founders of
the Colony of New Plymouth in Massachusetts.

George Morton married in Leyden, Holland, July 23 or August
12, 1612, Juliana Carpenter, daughter of Alexander Carpenter, of
Wrentham, England, and sister of Alice Carpenter, who became the

271

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

second wife of Governor Bradford. Juliana Carpenter married (sec-
ond), Manasseh Kempton, Esq., and died at Plymouth, Massachu-
setts, February 19, 1665. Her grave is on Burial Hill in Plymouth.
Children of George and Juliana (Carpenter) Morton: 1. Nathaniel,
born at Leyden, Holland, about 1613, died at Plymouth, Massachu-
setts, in 1685; married (first), in 1635, Lydia Cooper; married (sec-
ond), in 1674, Mrs. Hannah Taylor. 2. Patience, born at Leyden,
Holland, in 1615, died at Plymouth, Massachusetts, in 1651; mar-
ried, in 1633, John Faunce. 3. John, of whom further. 4. Sarah,
born at Leyden, Holland, in 1617-18, died at Plymouth, Massachu-
setts, 1694; married there, December 20, 1644, George Bonham, or
Bonum. 5. Ephraim, born on the ship “Ann,” in 1623, died at Plym-
outh, Massachusetts, 1693; married (first), in 1644, Anna Cooper;
married (second), Mrs. Mary Harlow. 6. George (perhaps); mar-
ried Phebe.

(S. C. Wade: “The Morton Genealogy,” pp. 25, 32, 45, 46.

W. T. Davis: “Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth,” Part II, p. 189.

“Representative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachu-
setts,” Vol. Ill, p. 1363. G. B. Cheeves: “Mourt’s Relation, A Jour-
nal of the Pilgrims at Plymouth, in New England in 1620,” pp. 1 1, 23.
J. K. Allen: “George Morton of Plymouth, Massachusetts, and

Some of His Descendants,” pp. 1-3, 7-9.)

II. John Morton, son of George and Juliana (Carpenter) Mor-
ton, was born at Leyden, Holland, about 1616-17, and died at Mid-
dleboro or Middleborough, Massachusetts, October 3, 1673. He
came from England with his parents in the ship “Ann” in 1623. It
is thought that after the death of his father he was adopted by Gov-
ernor Bradford.

John ( 1 ) Morton was made a freeman of Plymouth, Massachu-
setts, June 7, 1648, and chosen constable in 1654. In 1660 he was a
member of the grand inquest of Plymouth County, deputy of the Gen-
eral Court in 1662, tax assessor in 1664, selectman in 1666, collector of
the excise tax in 1668. In 1670 he removed to Middleboro, Plymouth
County, Massachusetts, where he was one of the twenty-six original
proprietors and founders and the town’s first representative to the
Massachusetts General Court, holding the office until his death. The
colonial records call him “a godly man.”

John Morton married, about 1648-49, Lettice, who died February
22, 1690. She might have been Lettice Hanford, widow of Edward

272

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Foster, of Scituate, Massachusetts, and niece of Timothy Hatherly,
of that place. Lettice Morton, after the death of her husband, mar-
ried (second) Andrew Ring. It is interesting to note that Andrew
Ring was the father of Mary Ring, who married John (2) Morton,
son of Lettice and John (1) Morton. Children of John (1) and
Lettice Morton: 1. John, born December 11, 1649, died December

20, 1649. 2- J°hn (again), of whom further. 3. Deborah, married
Francis Coombs. 4. Mary. 5. Martha. 6. Hannah, married John
Fuller. 7. Esther. 8. Ephraim (twin). 9. Manasseh (twin).

(W. C. Wade: “The Morton Genealogy,” p. 48. Davis:

“Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth,” p. 189. J. K. Allen: “George

Morton of Plymouth and Some of His Descendants,” pp. 11, 12.)

III. John (2) Morton , son of John (1) and Lettice Morton, was
born December 21, 1650, at Plymouth, Massachusetts, and died at
Middleboro, Massachusetts, March 20, 1718. He is said to have
established the first absolutely free public school in America. This he
“erected and kept” at Plymouth in 1671 “for the education of chil-
dren and youth.”

John Morton married (first), about 1680, Phebe Shaw, daughter
of Jonathan Shaw. He married (second), at Middleboro, Massa-
chusetts, about 1687, Mary Ring. (Ring III.) Children of the first
marriage, born at Middleboro: 1. Joanna, born February, 1682;

married, at Middleboro, July 3, 1705, Elisha Vaughn. 2. Phebe,
born July 7, 1685; married, 1719, John Murloch. Children of the
second marriage, born at Middleboro: 3. Mary, born December 15,
1689; married, in 1711, Joseph Hall. 4. John, born June, 1693. 5*
Hannah, of whom further. 6. Captain Ebenezer, born October 19,
1696. 7. Deborah, born 1698; married Caleb Stetson. 8. Perez

(Persis), born November 27, 1700.

(S. C. Wade: “The Morton Genealogy,” p. 57. Davis:

“Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth,” Part II, p. 189. J. K. Allen:
“George Morton of Plymouth and Some of His Descendants,” pp.
12, 13, 14. “Mayflower Descendant,” Vol. IV, p. 195.)

IV. Hannah Morton, daughter of John (2) and Mary (Ring)
Morton, was born at Middleboro, Massachusetts, September 1, 1694.

Hannah Morton married John Hodges. (Hodges III.)

(Almon D. Hodges: “Genealogical Record of the Hodges Fam-
ily of New England,” p. 84.)

273

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

(The Ring Line)

Arms — Argent on a bend gules, three crescents of the first.

Crest — A hand vested sable cuffed or, holding a roll of paper.

( Burke : “General Armory.” Clark L. Ring : “A History of the Ring

Family, 1631-1928.”)

The surname Ring is found registered at the Parish of Hoghton,
County of Lancaster, England, over a period of seven hundred years,
and representatives of the first branch of the family are still living
there. One of this name, Joseph Ring, was a member of the British
Parliament in the reign of King Charles I.

(Clark L. Ring: “A History of the Ring Family, 1631-1828,”

pp. 1-4.)

I. Mary Ring, a widow, came from England across to Plymouth,
Massachusetts, in 1629. With her she brought her three children, the
oldest of whom was but thirteen years of age.

Mary Ring died July 15, 1631, and her will was proved in the
public court “the 28th of October, in the ninth year of the reign of
our sovereign Lord Charles First, King of England.” It read, in
part, as follows :

To son Andrew all brass and pewter, new bed and bolster and
other household items, also all my cattle, land and tools. To daugh-
ter Susan Clark, bed and coverlet. Names daughter Elizabeth Deane.
Requests that son Andrew “be left with my son-in-law Stephen Deane
and do require of my son Deane to help him forward in the knowledge
and fear of God, not to oppress him by any burdens, but be tender to
him as he will answer to God.” Friends Samuel Fuller and Thomas
Blossom appointed overseers.

Children of Mary Ring: 1. Andrew, of whom further. 2. Susan.

3. Elizabeth, married Stephen Deane.

(C. L. Ring: “A History of the Ring Family,” pp. 1-4. W. T.
Davis: “Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth,” Part II, p. 216.)

II. Andrew Ring, the son of the widow Mary Ring, was born in
England in 1617. He came to Plymouth, Massachusetts, with his
mother in 1629. Following the death of his mother, when Andrew
was only sixteen, he was placed in the care of Samuel Fuller. In 1640
he owned land in what was later known as Rings Lane in Plymouth,
Massachusetts. After his second marriage Andrew Ring went with
others to settle a new Colony at Middleboro, Massachusetts.

274

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Andrew Ring died at Plymouth, Massachusetts, February 22,
1692-93. His will is on file in the Connecticut Historical Society at
Hartford, Connecticut. It is in the handwriting of Rev. John Cot-
ton, of Plymouth, Massachusetts. The inventory of the estate was
taken March 18, 1692-93, and the will probated March 22, 1692-93.
The will dated December 14, 1691, names the eldest son William,
son Eliezer, grandson John Mayo, son of his daughter Elizabeth
Mayo, grandson Andrew Ring, child of his son Eliezer, granddaughter
Mary Morton, “daughter of my daughter Mary Morton,” also daugh-
ters Deborah and Susanna. Inventory includes household articles, land,
and cattle.

Andrew Ring married (first), in 1646, Deborah Hopkins. (Hop-
kins II.) He married (second), Lettice Morton, widow of John
Morton. She died February 22, 1690, aged about sixty-six. Chil-
dren of the first marriage: 1. William, buried in the old Plymouth

cemetery. 2. Eleazar, buried in the old Plymouth cemetery; mar-
ried, January 11, 1687, Mary Shaw. 3. Mary, of whom further. 4.
Deborah. 5. Susanna. 6. Elizabeth; married Mr. Mayo, of East-
ham, Massachusetts. 7. Samuel, married Sarah.

(“Mayflower Descendant,” Vol. IV, pp. 193-95.)

III. Mary Ring, daughter of Andrew and Deborah (Hopkins)
Ring, married, as his second wife, John Morton. (Morton III.)

(“Mayflower Index,” Vol. IV, p. 193. John K. Allen: “George
Morton of Plymouth Colony and Some of His Descendants,” p. 12.
W. T. Davis: “Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth,” Part II, p. 216.)

(The Hopkins Line)

Arms — Sable, on a chevron between three pistols or, as many roses gules.

Crest — A tower per bend indented, argent and gules, in flames proper.

Motto — Pietas est pax. (Matthews: “American Armoury.”)

Of historic interest is the old custom of substituting the initial let-
ter H for R in nicknames, the form Hob being of frequent use for
Rob. With the acquisition of the diminutive kin, and the sharpening
of Hobbins into Hopkins, the derivation of the surname may be read-
ily perceived. The name was used as early as 1273, when a Nicholas
Hobekyn was on record in the Hundred Rolls of County Cambridge.

(Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

I. Stephen Hopkins was born in England in 1580 and died at
Plymouth, Massachusetts, before August 20, 1644. He came to

275

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

America from London in the “Mayflower” in 1620. He was one of
the well-to-do Pilgrims, and although little is known of his life before
he came to America, he is recorded as a man of energy, courage and
ability, who became one of the most prominent and useful men of the
Colony. He was one of the assistants to the Governor, 1633-37, and
there is very frequent mention of him in the records of the Plymouth
Colony.

Stephen Hopkins married (first) in England; married (second)
Elizabeth. Children of the first marriage: 1. Giles, born in Eng-

land, about 1605; married Katherine Whelden. 2. Constance, died
at Eastham, Massachusetts, October, 1677; married Nicholas Snow.
Children of the second marriage : 3. Damaris, born in England; mar-
ried Jacob Cooke. 4. Oceanus, born on shipboard, October, 1620,
died in 1627. 5. Caleb, born in Plymouth, before June 6, 1623. 6.

Deborah, of whom further. 7. Ruth, born in Plymouth, died an
infant. 8. Elizabeth, born in Plymouth, died in 1659.

(Grace Fielding Hall: “A Mayflower Line — Hopkins, Snow,

Cook,” p. 1.)

II. Deborah Hopkins, daughter of Stephen and Elizabeth Hop-
kins, was born in Plymouth in 1622. She married Andrew Ring.
(Ring II.)

(Ibid.)

(The Cushman Line)

Arms — Sable, three cinquefoils two and one between nine crosses crosslet argent.

Crest — A demi-lion rampant sable, semee of crosses crosslet argent, holding between the
paws a cinquefoil of the last. (Burke: “General Armory.”)

One surname authority states that the name Cushman perhaps was
derived from the word “cuishman,” designating a maker of cuish, or
thigh armor. Other records, however, state that Cushman is a
later spelling of the English surname Couchman, “the couchman,”
designating an occupation, probably similar to our modern coachman.
In the sixteenth century John Coacheman, Richard Couchman and
William Coucheman are found recorded in England, and a family of
Couchman is recorded as living in Canterbury, Kent, for at least two
generations before the time of Henry VIII. No proof has been
found, but it is highly probable that Robert Cushman, founder of our
line in America, came from this family.

(C. W. Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”
H. Harrison: “Surnames of the United Kingdom.” H. W. Cush-

276

(GCxx pfymttvc)

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

man : “A Historical and Biographical Genealogy of the Cushmans,”

p. 65.)

I. Robert Cushman, American progenitor of this line, was born
in England, probably between 1580 and 1585. He died in England
about January or February, 1625. He was a Puritan, and joined the
company of people who had moved to Leyden, Holland, seeking reli-
gious freedom. He and Deacon John Carver were of the group
founded in England under Royal Sanction, and called “The Virginia
Company.” They were chosen to go to London to make arrange-
ments for permission to settle in the Company’s territory in North
America. After many delays, the ships “Mayflower” and “Speed-
well” set sail on August 5, 1620. Robert Cushman was among those
obliged to return to England when trouble developed with the “Speed-
well,” as the “Mayflower” could not carry all the passengers.

After the “Mayflower” returned to England, May 6, 1621, bring-
ing news of the Colony in the New World, Robert Cushman began
his preparations for taking those to New England who had been left
behind. In July, 1621, a party of thirty-six, including Robert Cush-
man and his son, Thomas, set sail in the ship “Fortune,” arriving off
Cape Cod, Friday, November 9, 1621, with all the passengers in
good health. Becoming aware that there was dissatisfaction among
the colonists, on Wednesday, December 12, 1621, Robert Cushman
delivered a sermon, addressed to “my loving friends the Adventurers
for New England,” although he was not a clergyman, nor a “Speak-
ing Elder.” This sermon, the first delivered in New England to be
printed, was published for the first time in London in 1622, and has
been reprinted many times since then. On December 13, 1621, when
Robert Cushman, as agent of the Pilgrims, sailed for England to
report on the conditions of the Colony, he placed his son, Thomas, in
the care of his intimate friend, Governor Bradford, where he remained
until he reached manhood. In 1623, “Robert Cochman” was assigned
“one acre, These lye on the south side of the Brook to the Baywards,”
although he was still in London, which indicates the important posi-
tion he occupied in the opinion of the Governor and the Colony.

In 1623, Robert Cushman and Edward Winslow, who had accom-
panied him to England on business for the Colony, negotiated with
Lord Sheffield for a tract of land lying on Cape Ann in the present
town of Gloucester, for the purpose of establishing a Colony there,

277

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

thus extending the settlement in the new country and benefiting the
Pilgrim colonists at Plymouth. The Colony began under the charter
obtained by Cushman and Winslow, and under the auspices of the
Plymouth Colony, and was the first permanent settlement on the ter-
ritory of the Massachusetts Colony. In this charter the name of
Robert Cushman is placed before that of Edward Winslow.

Robert Cushman died while in London, and when Governor Brad-
ford heard of his death, he said, “And now we have lost a wise
and faithful friend. He proposed to be with us on the next ship, but
the Lord did otherwise dispose, and had appointed him a greater

journey to a better place He was our right hand with the

adventurers, who for divers years has managed all our business with
them to our great advantage.” Among the many tributes paid him
was one published in 1785, written by Hon. John Davis, who wrote:
“Robert Cushman was one of the most distinguished characters among
the collection of worthies who quitted England on account of their
religious difficulties and settled with Mr. John Robinson, their Pas-
tor, in the city of Leyden, in 1609.”

Robert Cushman married (first), probably in England, Sarah
Reder; (second), at Leyden, Holland, June 3, 1617, Mary Singleton
(or Shingleton), of Sandwich, England. Child of the first marriage:
1. Thomas, of whom further.

(H. W. Cushman: “Historical and Biographical Genealogy of

the Cushmans,” pp. 9, 14-15, 16, 24-31, 38-39, 41, 64, 65-66, 68, 70,
77, 84, 85, 89, 90, 97. “American Ancestry,” Vol. I, p. 20; Vol.
Ill, p. 12; Vol. IX, p. 100. J. H. Beers: “Representative Men

and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 105.
A. Ames: “The Mayflower and Her Log,” pp. 146-47.)

II. Elder Thomas Cushman, son of Robert and Sarah (Reder)
Cushman, was born in England in February, 1608, died, according to
the inscription on his gravestone, December 10, 1691, and according
to the church records, December 11, 1691, in his eighty- fourth year.
He is buried on “Burying Hill” overlooking Plymouth Harbor. He
came to America with his father in the ship “Fortune,” arriving at
Plymouth in November, 1621. As his father had placed him in the
care of Governor Bradford, and had unexpectedly died in London,
Elder Thomas Cushman grew up in the Bradford family. On July

278

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

i, 1633, he was among those “admitted into the freedom of the
society.” He was then aged about twenty-five or twenty-six.

In 1635 Thomas Cushman served as a juryman. He owned a
small amount of land in Plymouth in 1637 and about that time moved
to Jones River (which is now Kingston), where he resided until his
death. In 1645 he purchased “Prence’s Farm” at Jones River (which
is now “Rocky Nook” in Kingston), by exchanging land at Sowanes,
on Narragansett Bay in Rhode Island, for it, for £75. It was previ-
ously owned by his father-in-law, Isaac Allerton. A spring of water
near this property has for many years been called “the Elder’s Spring,”
and is often visited as a place of interest. After the death of the
venerable Elder Brewster, in 1649, Thomas Cushman was appointed
ruling elder of the church of Plymouth, and was ordained to the office
by appropriate religious services on Friday, April 6, 1649. Having
been brought up in the family of Governor Bradford, Elder Cushman
was always his intimate and confidential friend, and was the principal
witness to his will, which was proved at Plymouth, June 8, 1657, and
also inventoried the Governor’s estate. Thomas Cushman’s will was
made about a year before his death, October 22, 1690.

Elder Thomas Cushman married, about 1635-36, Mary Allerton.
(Allerton II.) Children: 1. Thomas, born September 16, 1637,

died August 23, 1726; married (first), November 17, 1664, Ruth
Howland, died between 1672-79, daughter of John Howland; (sec-
ond), October 16, 1679, Abigail Fuller, of Rehoboth. 2. Sarah,
married, April 11, 1661, John Hawks. 3. Lydia, married William
Harlow, Jr. 4. Rev. Isaac, of whom further. 5. Elkanah (Deacon) ,
born June 1, 1651, died at Plympton, September 4, 1727; married,
February 16, 1676-77, Elizabeth Cole; (second), March 2, 1682-83,
Martha Cooke. 6. Feare, born June 20, 1653, died young. 7. Elea-
zer, born February 20, 1656-57; married, January 12, 1687-88, Eliza-
beth Combes. 8. Mary, died before 1790; married Mr. Hutchinson,
of Lynn.

(H. W. Cushman: “A Historical and Biographical Genealogy of
the Cushmans,” pp. 84, 85-89, 90-93, 97, 100-01, 123-24. “Ameri-
can Ancestry,” Vol. I, p. 20. J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and
Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 106. Aller-
ton and Currier: “A History of the Allerton Family in the United

States,” p. 30.)

279

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

III. Rev. Isaac Cushman, son of Elder Thomas and Mary (Aller-
ton) Cushman, was born at Plymouth, Massachusetts, February 8,
1647-48, and died October 21, 1732, in his eighty-fourth year. He
had the advantage of obtaining a better education than most men of
his day. He was a deacon of Plymouth Church, and in 1685 was one
of the selectmen. In June, 1690, he and John Bradford were
appointed deputies from Plymouth to the General Court, and they
also served at another General Court held that year, and at one held
in June, 1691.

When Isaac Cushman was about forty-five years of age, he decided
to enter the ministry. That he had not been a ruling elder was a
drawback, but objections were finally overcome and he was ordained
when he was about fifty years of age. He received calls to be minister at
Middleborough and Plympton, but chose Plympton, and was pastor
there until his death. He was called “a pious and godly man.” In
1701 his salary was £35, and was increased until in 1728 it was £85
per year. He had a large estate for the times, and during his life-
time gave land to two of his sons, Isaac and Ichabod. His will was
dated October 5, 1727, and in it he made bequests to his wife and
children.

Rev. Isaac Cushman married, about 1675, Mary Ricard or Rick-
ard, born in 1654, died at Plymouth, September 27, 1727, aged
seventy-three. Children: 1. Isaac, born November 15, 1676, died

September 18, 1727; married (first), January 28, 1700-01, Sarah
(Warner) Gibbs, daughter of Nathaniel Warner; (second), October
10, 1717, Mercy (Bradford) Freeman, daughter of Major Jonathan
Bradford. 2. Rebekah, born November 30, 1678; married, Novem-
ber 18, 1701, Jacob Mitchel. 3. Mary, born October 12, 1682, bap-
tized at Plympton, in 1692; married, March 19, 1702, Robert Water-
man. 4. Sarah, born April 17, 1684; married (first) James Bryant;
(second) James Bradford. 5. Ichabod, of whom further. 6. Feare,
born March 10, 1689, died July 13, 1746; married, February 12,
1707-08, William Sturtevant.

(H. W. Cushman: “A Historical and Biographical Genealogy of
the Cushmans,” pp. 101, 103, 110-12, 119-20, 126-27. W. T. Davis:
“Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth,” p. 77. J. H. Beers: “Represen-
tative Men and Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol.
Ill, p. 1155. “Register of the Massachusetts Society of the Colonial

280

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Dames of America, 1893-1927,” p. 373. Thomas Weston: “His-

tory of the Town of Middleboro, Massachusetts,” p. 623.)

IV. Ichabod Cushman, son of Rev. Isaac and Mary (Ricard or
Rickard) Cushman, was born October 30, 1686, and died before
1736, the year his wife settled his estate. He was a resident of
Plympton and Middleborough, Massachusetts. During his father’s
lifetime he received his share of land, and in his father’s will a bequest
of a fifth part of his books.

Ichabod Cushman married (first) Esther Barnes, daughter of
Jonathan Barnes; (second), November 27, 1712, Patience Holmes,
daughter of John Holmes. She married (second) Elnathan Wood,
who became the guardian of Patience Cushman, one of Ichabod Cush-
man’s daughters. Children of the second marriage, first three born
at Plympton, others at Middleborough, Massachusetts: 1. Joanna,

born December 17, 1713; married Ichabod Bosworth. 2. William,
born October 13, 1715, diedAugust 27, 1768; married (first) , Decem-
ber 25, 1735, Susanna Sampson; married (second), in 1751, Priscilla
Cobb. 3. Sarah, born November 8, 1717; married, August 12, 1735,
Daniel Vaughan. 4. Experience, born July 12, 1719; married, Sep-
tember 6, 1737, Jonathan Smith. 5. Patience, born April 8, 1721;
married, July 23, 1739, Caleb Sturtevant. 6. Mary, born December
22, 1723; married, November 24, 1743, Jedediah Lyon. 7. Ichabod,
born May 12, 1725; married (first), March 4, 1751, Patience Mack-
fern; (second), Hope White. 8. Rebekah, born July 11, 1727; mar-
ried, January 14, 1744-45, Manassah Clapp. 9. Isaac (2), of whom
further.

(H. W. Cushman: “A Historical and Biographical Genealogy of
the Cushmans,” pp. 120, 127, 135. W. T. Davis: “American Land-
marks of Plymouth,” p. 77. “Vital Records of Plympton, Massachu-
setts,” pp. 84, 85, 86, 87. J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and

Old Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, p. 1155.)

V. Isaac (2) Cushman, son of Ichabod and Patience (Holmes)

Cushman, was born at Middleborough, Massachusetts, August 12,
1730, and died August 1, 1820. He married, probably in 1756,
Sarah Miller, who died August 11, 1806. Children: 1. Sarah, born

May 13, 1757. 2. Eliphalet, born February 25, 1759; married,

November 25, 1784, Joanna Wood. 3. Elias, born May 14, 1761. 4.
Zebulon, born July 25, 1763; married (first) Deborah Wood, who

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

died January 2, 1801; married (second), April 2, 1818, Nancy Hall.
5. Olive, born February 28, 1766. 6. Betsy, born April 1, 1768. 7.

Isaac (3), of whom further. 8. Hannah, born September 18, 1773.
9. Rebecca, born May 27, 1776.

(H. W. Cushman: “A Historical and Biographical Genealogy of
the Cushmans,” pp. 136, 168, 169. “Vital Records of Plympton,
Massachusetts,” p. 84. J. H. Beers: “Representative Men and Old
Families of Southeastern Massachusetts,” Vol. Ill, p. 1155.)

VI. Isaac (3) Cushman, son of Isaac (2) and Sarah (Miller)
Cushman, was born December 9, 1770. He held the office of ensign.

Isaac (3) Cushman married, in 1794, Lydia Pratt. Children:
1. Elias, born in 1795; married Betsy Southworth. 2. Venus, born
May 29, 1797; married Melintha Nye. 3. George, married Louisa
Haywood. 4. Lydia, born August 8, 1801 ; married Samuel Hall. 5.
Hannah, married Jacob Miller. 6. Isaac (twin, probably of Hannah,
above), born July 9, 1803, died in 1825. 7. Eliphalet, born March

8, 1806; married Eliza Doane. 8. Abraham, of whom further.

(H. W. Cushman: “A Historical and Biographical Genealogy of
the Cushmans,” pp. 168, 301.)

VII. Abraham Cushman, son of Isaac (3) and Lydia (Pratt)

Cushman, was born November 6, 1808. He married Abigail Cole,
of Middleborough, Massachusetts. Children: 1. Mary Ann, of

whom further. 2. Abraham Harrison, born about 1840. 3. Sarah

Caroline, born about 1846.

(Ibid., pp. 301, 541.)

VIII. Mary Ann Cushman, daughter of Abraham and Abigail
(Cole) Cushman, was born at Middleborough, Massachusetts, July
31, 1836, and died August 23, 1913. She married George Allen
Mason. (Mason VII.)

(Family data.)

(The Allerton Line)

Arms — Argent, a chevron between three lions’ heads erased sable.

Crest — A lion’s head collared.

(Matthews: “American Armoury.” Burke: “General Armory.”)

Allerton is one of the many surnames derived from residence in a
town. A parish of the name Allerton is found near Knaresborough,
Yorkshire; a township of the name is in the parish of Childwell, near

282

| In Ye Name of God, Amen.

jj We whofe names are underwritten, the. loyal fubjects of our
£ dread fovereigne Lord, King James, by ye grace of God, of Great
j» Britaine, France and Ireland, King, defender of ye faith, etc., have*
$ ing undertaken for ye glory of God and advancement of ye Chris-
j! tian faith, and honour of our King and countrie, a voyage to plant
5 ye firft Colonie in ye Northerne parts of Virginia, doe by thefe
jj prefents folemnly, and mutualy, in ye prefence of God, and of one
jj another, covenant and combine ourfelves iogeather into a civil body
*) politik for our. better ordering and prefervation and furtherance of
l ye end aforefaid, and by vertue hearof to enacte, conftitute and

* frame fuch juft and equal lawes, ordinances, acts, corvftitutionfc and

> offices from time to time, as lhall be thought moft meete and con-

> venient for ye generall good of ye Colonie, unto which we pvomife
£ all due fubmiffion and obedience. In witnes whereof we have
) hereunder fubfcribed our names at Cape-Codd ye 1 1 of November,
\ in ye year of ye raigne of our fovereigne Lord, King James of En-
? gland, Franpe and Ireland, ye eighteenth, and of Scotland ye fiftie-

• fourth, Ano Dom. 1620.

John Carver,

William Bradford,

Edward Winslow,

William Brewster,

Isaac Allerton,

Myles Stand isb,

John Alden,

Samuel Fuller,

Christopher Martin,

William Mullins,

11. William White,

12. Richard Warren,

13. John Howland,

14. Stephen Hopkins,

MAYFLOWER COMPACT

10.

15. Edward Tilley,
1U. John iilley,

17. Francis Cooke,
IS. Thomns Rogers.
10. Thomas Tinker.

20. John KigdaJe,

21. Edward Fuller,

22. John Turner.

23. Francis Eaton.
2-1. Jnnies Chilton,
25, John Crackston.
2C. John Bllliugton,
27. Moses Fletcher,
2*. John (ioodmnu,

Z 4. Degorv Priest,

30. Thomns Williams,

31. Gilbert Winslow,

32. Edmond Margeson,

33. Peter Brown,

34. Richard Britterldge,

35. George Sonle,

3<i. Richard Clarke,

37. Richard Gardiner,
3S. John Allerton,

30. Thomas English,

40. Edward Dotey*

41. Edward Lister,

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Liverpool, and another township is in the parish of Kippax, West
Riding, Yorkshire. In 1379, Willelmus de Allirton and Johannes de
Allerton were recorded in Yorkshire.

(C. W. Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

I. Isaac Allerton, progenitor of the family in America, was born
in England in 1586, and died in New Haven, Connecticut, early in
1659. Until he was about twenty-six years old, he was a resident of
London, and was called a “young tailor.” In 1608 or 1609, he
removed to Holland, where he joined the society of Separatists, and
was called by the Dutch a “merchant of Suffolk.” In 1614 the privi-
lege of citizenship was granted him by the city of Leyden. He
embarked for New England in 1620, a passenger in the cabin of the
“Mayflower,” it being preceded only by Carver, Bradford, Winslow,
and Brewster. He brought with him his wife, a boy servant and three
children, leaving behind him his youngest child, Sarah, with her aunt
in London. She later came to America in the ship “Ann.” He was
one of the wealthiest of the Pilgrims, and he became an important
figure in all Colonial affairs. In 1621, Isaac Allerton was elected
assistant governor, a position he held until 1624.

In 1626, Isaac Allterton was elected by the colonists to go to Eng-
land to arrange for supplies, and to secure a release from the compact
made with The Adventurers. He was selected because of being well
educated, experienced, and having the confidence of the merchants
of London. He made several other business trips to London for the
colonists.

Isaac Allerton was the first merchant of New England, and the
founder of the coast trade and fishing industry of the Colony. He
founded Marblehead, Massachusetts, and made that place the head-
quarters for his fishing fleet, and his place of residence for the greater
part of his time. He became a permanent resident of New Haven,
Connecticut, in 1647, where he built “a grand house on the creek, with
four porches.” As a business man, he was in advance of his associates.
He early saw the possibilities of the trade and commerce of New Eng-
land, its natural position for coast trade, and exhibited a remarkable
business acumen for the accumulation of wealth. As a founder of
New England’s great industry of fishing, he erected a monument to
his memory that never shall be erased.

283

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Isaac Allerton married (first), in Leyden Holland, November 4,
1 6 1 1 , Mary Norris, of Newbury, County Berks, England. She died
in Plymouth, Massachusetts, February 25, 1621 or 1625. This was
the first marriage solemnized by the Leyden exiles. He married (sec-
ond), in 1626, Fear Brewster, daughter of Elder William and Mary
Brewster. Fear Brewster came to Plymouth, Massachusetts, in 1623,
in the ship “Ann” and died at Plymouth, December 12, 1634. Isaac
Allerton married (third), before 1644, Johanna, who died at New
Haven, Connecticut, in 1682. Children of the first marriage: 1.

Bartholomew, born about 1612, died in England; married in Eng-
land. 2. Remember, born in 1614, died at Salem, Massachusetts,
between September 12, 1652, and October 22, 1656; married Moses
Maverick. 3. Mary, of whom further. 4. Sarah. 5. Child, born
dead on the “Mayflower” in 1620. Child of the second marriage:
6. Isaac, born in 1630, died in Virginia, in 1702; married (first)
Elizabeth; (second) Elizabeth ( Willoughby-Overzee) Colclough.

(Allerton and Currier: “A History of the Allerton Family in the
United States,” pp. 13-30, 118, 121. A. Ames: “The Mayflower

and Her Log,” p. 167. “New England Historical and Genealogical
Register,” Vol. XLIV, p. 290: “Tercentenary of New England Fami-
lies,” Vol. I, pp. 46, 47.

II. Mary Allerton, daughter of Isaac and Mary (Norris) Aller-
ton, was born in Leyden, in June, 1616, and died in 1699, the last
survivor of the “Mayflower.” She married Elder Thomas Cushman.
(Cushman II.)

(Ibid.)

(Mayflower Descent)

I. Stephen Hopkins, emigrant ancestor, was born in England in
1580 and died at Plymouth, Massachusetts, before August 20, 1644.
He came to America from London in the “Mayflower” in 1620.

Stephen Hopkins married (first) in England; married (second)
Elizabeth. Among their children was Deborah, of whom further.

II. Deborah Hopkins, daughter of Stephen and Elizabeth Hop-
kins, was born in Plymouth in 1622. She married Andrew Ring.
(Ring II.) They had a daughter: Mary, of whom further.

III. Mary Ring, daughter of Andrew and Deborah (Hopkins)
Ring, married, as his second wife, John Morton. (Morton III.)
Among the children of this marriage was : Hannah, of whom further.

284

MASON AND ALLIED FAMILIES

IV. Hannah Morton, daughter of John (2) and Mary (Ring)
Morton, was born at Middleboro, Massachusetts, September 1, 1694.

Hannah Morton married John Hodges. (Hodges III.) Among
the children of this union was : Andrew, of whom further.

V. Andrew Hodges, son of John and Hannah (Morton) Hodges,
was born at Norton, Massachusetts, in 1729 or 1730, and died there
in January, 1777.

Andrew Hodges married (first), Mehitable Leonard. He mar-
ried (second), intentions published May 17, 1773, Abigail Hoskins,
born in 1741, died in 1824. The child of the second marriage was:
Leonard, of whom further.

VI. Leonard Hodges, son of Andrew and Abigail (Hoskins)
Hodges, was born at Norton, Massachusetts, March 13, 1774, and
died there March 7, 1841.

Leonard Hodges married, at Taunton, Massachusetts, March 13,
1798, Hannah Peck. (Peck VI.) They were parents of: Louisa

Caroline, of whom further.

VII. Louisa Caroline Hodges, daughter of Leonard and Hannah
(Peck) Hodges, was born in Norton, Massachusetts, May 18, 1808,
and died March 18, 1879.

Louisa Caroline Hodges married Dennis Capron. (Capron V.)
Among the children of this union was: Eliza Jane, of whom further.

VIII. Eliza Jane Capron, daughter of Dennis and Louisa Caro-
line (Hodges) Capron, was born January 10, 1831.

Eliza Jane Capron married Shepard Wheaton Carpenter. (Car-
penter VIII.) They were parents of a daughter: Mabel Wheaton,

of whom further.

IX. Mabel Wheaton Carpenter, daughter of Shepard Wheaton
and Eliza Jane (Capron) Carpenter, married Frederick George
Mason. (Mason VIII.)

285

DUMBARTON CASTLE (WEST SIDE) ABOUT 1685

AMERICANA

JULY, 1939

Francis Hop! inson an J the
American Flag'

By George E. Hastings, Ph. D., Professor of English,
University of Arkansas

N June 14, 1777, the Continental Congress passed a
resolution :

“That the flag of the ||thirteen|| United States be
thirteen stripes, alternate red and white : that the Union be
thirteen stars, white in a blue field, representing a new constellation.”1 2

Who introduced this resolution, and who designed the flag described
in it the “Journals of Congress” neglect to state; hence much specula-
tion about the origin of the flag has arisen. For example, one of the
authors of the “Flag Number” of the “National Geographic Maga-
zine” quotes an authority who advances the following theory concern-
ing the origin of the colors employed in the national ensign:

“The flag may trace its ancestry back to Mount Sinai, whence the
Lord gave to Moses the Ten Commandments and the book of the
law, which testify of God’s will and man’s duty; and were deposited
in the Ark of the Covenant within the Tabernacle, whose curtains were
blue, purple, scarlet and fine-twined linen.”3

1. Some of the material used in this paper is to be found in my “Life and Works of
Francis Hopkinson’’ (The University of Chicago Press, 1926), pp. 238-57. Limitations of
space, however, made it impossible for me to present all the evidence I had even when
that book was published, and various circumstances have since prevented me from pub-
lishing a supplementary article, though new evidence has come to light. Meanwhile the
interest of the public in the subject still brings me letters of inquiry. For this reason, I
have set down here as briefly as I can all that I know about Francis Hopkinson’s con-
nection with the American flag.

2. “Journals of the Continental Congress,” VIII (Washington: Government Print-

ing Office, 1907), 464.

3. Commander Byron McCandlers, U. S. N., “The Story of the American Flag,”
“The National Geographic Magazine,” XXXII, 303 (October, 1917).

293

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

This is the only authority I know who has suggested that God
hiriiself had a hand in the designing of the flag; in general those who
have written histories of the national ensign have been willing to con-
cede that it was designed on earth by a human being. All school chil-
dren and most teachers believe Betsy Ross to have been the designer
of the flag, and consequently pay great reverence to her memory.
Historians seeking by scholarly research to discover the origin of
the flag have traced the colors and design to various sources, such as
the flag of Holland, the colonial banner of Rhode Island, and the
coat-of-arms of the Washington family.4 Whatever the original
source of the design, I shall here present evidence that the designer
was Francis Hopkinson.

Francis Hopkinson, a native of Philadelphia and a prominent fig-
ure in the history of both Pennsylvania and New Jersey, was some-
what like Benjamin Franklin in the number and variety of his attain-
ments. Besides being an able lawyer, a shrewd politician, and a capa-
ble executive, he was an inventor, an artist, a musician, a poet, and an
essayist. He was a member of the Second Continental Congress and
a signer of the Declaration of Independence. From 1776 to 1778
he served as chairman of a committee of three who were appointed by
Congress to execute the business of the navy under the direction of
the Marine Committee. From 1778 to 1781 he held the position of
Treasurer of Loans, from 1779 to 1789 he was Judge of the Admi-
ralty for Pennsylvania, and from 1789 until his death in 1791 he
was Judge of the United States District Court of the Eastern Dis-
trict of Pennsylvania.

Hopkinson had some natural artistic ability, and in his youth
studied drawing, probably under Pierre Eugene Du Simitiere or Ben-
jamin West, or under both. During a visit to England in 1766-67 he
copied a coat of arms from the tomb of a great-uncle of his, and after
his return home he seems to have acquired the reputation of being
something of an authority on heraldry. In 1770 he was one of a com-
mittee who designed a seal for the American Philosophical Society ; in
1776 he and Du Simitiere designed the Great Seal of New Jersey, and
in 1782 he designed a seal for the University of the State of Pennsyl-
vania, now the University of Pennsylvania.

4. See, for example, Willis Fletcher Johnson, “The National Flag: A History,”

(Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1930), pp. 5, 12, 36, etc.

294

' * •V t

- /f*-*

^Jte. <

*Ma3 c-f-z/iinj «4< <-/ 3f u^-.

/<7»- *- -rS^y.

&yy .'■*&«. .

ym / yZ<*Jz ' 'x'*y /.‘/z*r*~ s ><,■<■ ~ &..j?. £*r <■*■■■,

.&* <***&£*+ w «.,'* ^4fL«^
> «*. ^
S,.

£* yy^ - ~;

'* J'y ‘fst- ****

yC /£<

^ y^r. ^ ,5^? y/ c^r.^y
■—<> ^ i

*-^.-^»^ ^ -~^MI

^« A ^ ^V-

"t*» .

>-*«-**

^ «^v ^ sC^jl sC. suy^z* A<r^jy I

.^- ^ M-Je*. / wJ«C, «L. <^^<-^-,4.

ii"~« • /^"t- * » f£r~+*L «.,p,w ‘ :|

&~y*-. r* *~**~<S) yS,^ f
./, — . /. /~L .v <, — r^zs,„J7]
/:- /'^-'- - ~ L.',.. £ , X' -■ ^

w' U-^y 1, ^ $> £ 4C <X_. ^

y, *y *^ S «- ^ <v^ a. <3c__ y^ ' j

/*"'* y ^yy. -jg -

-A—

£vv\ -r t <?•■-<■ O £* *'-vt.,

se*s /C~, *-eS y^,

FIRST PAGE OF LETTER OF FRANCIS HOPKINSON TO THE BOARD OF
ADMIRALTY

(7~ ' —

&. * r' -

/tL/^-+

•c'~~-'— •• «Xt/w

# ~\~n /^>

CZ&S&S /ctr i > -

;

Of 9^.^ . <2i£.

SECOND PAGE OF SAME LETTER

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

The first intimation we have that Hopkinson had anything to do
with designing the flag described in the resolution of June 14, 1777,
appears in a letter which he wrote to the Board of Admiralty5 in May,
1780:

“Gentlemen.

It is with great Pleasure I understand my last Device of a Seal
for the Board of Admiralty has met with your Honours Approba-
tion. I have with Great Readiness, upon several Occasions exerted
my small Abilities for the public service ; &, as I flatter myself, to the
Satisfaction of those I wish’d to please,

Viz*.

the flag of the United States of America
7 Devices for the Continental Currency
A Seal for the Board of Treasury

Ornaments Devices & Checks for the new Bills of Exchange on Spain
& Holland

A Seal for Ship Papers of the United States
A Seal for the Board of Admiralty

The Borders, Ornaments & Checks for the new Continental Currency
now in the Press, — a Work of considerable Length
A Great Seal for the United States of America, with a Reverse.

For these Services I have as yet made no Charge, nor received any
Recompense. I now submit it to your Honour’s Consideration,
whether a Quarter Cask of the public Wine, will not be a proper & a
reasonable Reward for these Labours of Fancy and a suitable Encour-
agement to future Exertions of the like Nature.

I sincerely hope your Honours will be of this Opinion & am with
great Respect Gentlemen

Your very humble Serv*

Fras Hopkinson”6

Hopkinson’s letter is undated, but on May 25, 1780, John Brown,
secretary of the Board of Admiralty, forwarded it to the President of
Congress, with a request that it be laid before that body. In Con-
gress, according to endorsements on Brown’s letter, it was read on
the day on which it was received, and referred to the Board of Tras-
s' Congress established the Board of Admiralty on October 28, 1779, and on Decem-
ber 8, 1779, passed a resolution “that all matters heretofore referred to the Marine Com-
mittee be transmitted to the Board of Admiralty.” See “Journals,” XV (1909), 1217-18,
1366.

6. The Library of Congress, Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 136, Vol. IV,
fol. 685.

295

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

ury, who, on June 5 tersely directed that Hopkinson “state his account
and leave it with the Auditor.”7

Hopkinson lost no time in obeying these instructions, for on June
6 he filed with James Milligan, the Auditor General, the following
statement :

“Dr The United States of America to Francis Hopkinson
To sundry Devices, Drawings, Mottos & ca for public Use viz*.

The great Naval Flag of the United States

Seven Devices with Mottos & ca for former Emissions of the Conti-
nental Currency.

The Seal of the Board of Admiralty.

A Seal for the Shipping Papers of the U :S:

Seal of the Board of Treasury.

Ornaments, Borders & Checks for the Loan Office Certificates.

Ditto for the Bills of Exchange on Spain & Holland.

Ditto for the Continental Currency now in the Press.

The Great Seal of the United States with a Reverse.

Devices & Ornaments for the Commissions in the Navy of the United
States, now in Hand & not completed.

Philad® June 6°. 1780. £27oo-o-o8

Fras Hopkinson”

In the Auditor General’s office endorsements were added to
Hopkinson’s statement describing it as “Account Francis Hopkin-
son for sundry Devices, Drawings, Mottos & c Am* 7200 Dol-
lars,”9 and asserting that it was registered on “ye 6h June 1780” and
referred to the Commissioners of the Chamber of Accounts. The
Commissioners on June 12 returned the account to the Auditor Gen-
eral, with a statement that they had examined it and were “of the
opinion that the charge [was] reasonable and ought to be paid.” James
Milligan then, on June 13, forwarded all of the papers to the Board
of Treasury, with a statement that he had examined the account, had
“passed the same,” and was now presenting it for allowance.10

After having his account approved by the Commissioners of
Accounts and the Auditor General, Hopkinson, according to the usual

7. Ibid., No. 37, fol. 243. Brown’s letter is dated May 26, but May 25 is the
date given in the endorsement and also in the “Journals,” XVII (1910), 460, and XVIII
(1910), 983-85.

8. Papers, No. 136, Vol. IV, fol. 671.

9. The Continental dollar contained ninety pence and hence was worth three-eighths of
a pound. See “George Washington’s Accounts ....,” ed. by John C. Fitzpatrick
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1917), p. 141.

10. Papers, op. cit., fol. 675.

296

■

2rr&£ Ss^> <r /T ?

Xr '^-Vw \.f^C^ £s
X

^ X£? . .^T,

^v.^'.-""* *i..uw*a- Par; yC ^ ■ <+«■»**.* ^ .• . „

,//*-*^ -f •j/' /^5fc /Cfc/-^^ y'<7^t4iy u - --^

£f s~ pf <X^-~«>~w* — £*(?*.&

2fj* j£~>s ^ c'y/ - ~ ~ - — j? >. ^

o-X.^ * *v >»>^^ *X/ s*— rc-*~2£-y ■ - J? - ^ ..^

^Jb *5Lx f — / it

J$.~y/£-~ &£*■-' t'-’^<> '-~- XT-» pr-jg jf\ <$¥- 0

sy^Zj/i — * ^ ^ - ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

. « £- -r*--*-* ' ■ -.. ~ "- j— --n-^,,,^

/^/ >- X» ^ ^

__^£^X/-‘ ,jl ?n+^pppL “ ••-

a ^ Xi y£~~- <?<.*-' »'# • - - -

^<4?

5?X ~ /P'P&

BILL RENDERED BY FRANCIS HOPKINSON

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

procedure, should have had nothing more to do but appear before the
Board of Treasury and receive the £2700 or $7,200 called for in his
bill; but when he attempted to collect, he met with difficulties, for
the board refused to honor the account because it was not accom-
panied by vouchers, and because the amount charged for each indi-
vidual design was not named.11 Hopkinson was unable to furnish
vouchers showing that he was commissioned to make the designs, but
he did furnish, on June 24, the following itemized account :

“D° The United States to Francis Hopkinson
To sundry Drawings & Devices Viz.

The Naval Flag of the States £540-0-0

7 Devices for the Currency 420-0-0

Seal of the Board of Treasury 180-0-0

Ditto .... Board of Admiralty 180-0-0

Ditto for Shipping Papers 180-0-0

Checks & Devices for Certificates 120-0-0

Ditto for Bills of Exchange 180-0-0

Ditto for the new Currency now in the Press 300-0-0
The Great Seal of the States with a Reverse 600-0-0

£2700-0-0

Philad® June 24s 1780 Fras Hopkinson”12

Immediately after submitting the above account Hopkinson wrote
the Board of Treasury a letter beginning as follows:

“Gentlemen.

Agreeable to the Expectations of the Board I this Morning exhib-
ited an Account for certain Devices & c in which a charge was assigned
to each particular Service. This Charge however was made in hard
Money to be computed at 60 for One in Continental.

I have since recollected that your Honours might possibly object
to the passing an Account in that form, & therefore beg leave to with-
draw the said Acct. and substitute the enclosed in its place ”13

In this final account the individual charges are made in Continental
currency and the total is given in both Continental currency and specie :

“Dr the United States to Francis Hopkinson

To sundry Drawings & Devices Viz1.

The Naval Flag of the United States £9-0-0

11. Ibid., fol. 665-66.

12. Ibid., fol. 681.

13. Ibid., fol. 67454.

297

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

7 Devices with Mottos for the Currency 7-0-0

Seal of the Board of Treasury 3-0-0

D° of the Board of Admiralty 3-0-0

D° for Shipping Papers 3-0-0

Devices & Checks for Certificates 2-0-0

D° for Bills Exche 3-0-0

D° for the new Currency in the Press 5-0-0

The Great Seal of the States with a Reverse. . 1 0-0-0

£45-0-0

£45 in hard Money at 60 for One14 is . . . £27-0-0
Philad“ June 24" 1780

Fras Hopkinson”13

Endorsements show that Hopkinson’s final account was submitted
to the Board of Treasury on June 24, and was referred by him to the
Commissioners of Accounts on June 28. On June 29 they sent it back
to him with a statement that their report of June 12 had not been
recommitted, and that they therefore had no authority to take further
action until the proper technicalities had been observed. On July 1
the Auditor General returned all the correspondence to the Board of
Treasury with this note:

“As the winthin Report appears to be respecting form only, I beg
leave to submit it entirely to the consideration of the Commissioners
of the Board of Treasury.”

On August 4 the Board of Treasury sent the account back to the
Auditor General, “with special instructions” (which I have not been
able to find) , and he again sent it to the Commissioners of Accounts,16
who once more approved it, and on August 7 returned it to the Audi-
tor General, with a statement that they had again examined the
account and found there was due to Francis Hopkinson $7,200.17
By this time the Board of Treasury had evidently exhausted their
ingenuity in devising pretexts for referring Hopkinson’s account to
other divisions of the Treasury Department, and so they filed the

14. A pound in currency was worth six-tenths of a pound in specie.

15. Papers, op. cit., fol. 673. In my biography of Hopkinson, fol. 681, is treated as
the final account, since it is so listed in the files of the Library of Congress. A more
careful reading of Hopkinson’s somewhat ambiguous letter makes me think it more prob-
able that fol. 673 is the last statement. Both were sent to the Commissioners of Accounts.

16. Ibid., fol. 677.

17. Ibid., fol. 683.

298

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

correspondence away and took no further action on the matter for
more than two months.

Exasperated by the difficulties he had encountered in trying to
collect the money that he claimed as due to him, Hopkinson on June
2 6, 1780, two days after he had presented his final account, wrote to
Charles Lee, Secretary of the Board of Treasury, a letter beginning
with these spirited words :

“Sir.

Notwithstanding your positive Denial, on Saturday last, of having
received from me any other Account to present to the Board of
Treasury, excepting one on your File which you then exhibited, &
which you knew was not satisfactory to the Board, I have the fullest
Proof that you did receive from me, a Fortnight before, another
Account stated agreeable to the Will of the Board, & which you
thought proper to Suppress whereby my Business has been delayed. I
can assign no other Motive for such Conduct but a desire to injure

The rest of the letter is badly torn, but enough remains to inform
the reader that Hopkinson threatened to send a complaint to Con-
gress in case Lee did not give a satisfactory explanation of his conduct.

On June 27 Hopkinson added to the foregoing letter a memo-
randum stating that Lee had exonerated himself, but this he later
retracted by scratching it out, and by sending to Congress on July 6
a list of charges against the Board of Treasury. These charges, five
in number, may be briefly summarized as follows : ( 1 ) a haughty and
insolent attitude toward other officers of the government; (2) shame-
ful neglect and loss of public papers; (3) carelessness in carrying out
official duties; (4) usurpation of authority; (5) tampering with
official documents. In support of his second charge he made this
statement about his own account:

“I had an Account lying before the Board for certain Services done.
This Account went thro every Objection as to Form that Fancy could
suggest. At length one only way of modelling the Account remained.
This was done & the Account (as can be proved) laid on the Tempo-
rary Table. After a Fortnights Delay on Enquiry made, the Account
had never been seen, it was mis laid (sic) — it was lost. The Deficiency
was supplied — but alas too late the whole Affair had been crossed

18. A copy of this letter is among the papers of the late Edward Hopkinson, Esq., of
Philadelphia.

299

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

(?) out for want of Form, & the Fate of my Account remains
undetermined.”19

After receiving Hopkinson’s complaint, Congress referred the
whole matter to a committee, who on August 7 requested all officers
of the Treasury Department to meet them on the following Thursday
for a conference. The Commissioners of Accounts, the Auditor General,
the Treasurer, the Paymaster General, and the Treasurer of Loans
(Hopkinson) appeared at this conference, but the Board of Treasury
ignored the request. After examining the officers who were present,
the committee on August 25 submitted to Congress a report in which,
after mentioning the failure of the Board of Treasury to attend the
investigation, they substantiated at least two of Hopkinson’s charges.
This report brought out the fact that the Board of Treasury were
hostile to other members of the department besides Hopkinson. They
were not on speaking terms with the Commissioners of Accounts ; they
had attempted to dictate to the Treasurer; they had behaved to
various people who had business with them in a manner that was “very
reprehensible” and “extremely disgusting.” Hopkinson, the Treas-
urer of Loans, they had treated “with unmerited indignity” on various
occasions. Once when he came to them “upon public business,” a
member of the board had “shut the door in his face.” They con-
ducted their office in such a manner as to create “great uneasiness” :
for example they had “prohibited all access to themselves between
the hours of nine and twelve in the forenoon” ; and they compelled
other officers of the Treasury Department to transact with them “the
most trivial affairs in writing only.” In conclusion, the committee
recommended that Charles Lee, Ezekiel Forman, and John Gibson
be dismissed from the board, and that new members be elected to take
their places. Endorsements on the report show that it was read in
Congress on September 7 and recommitted on September 9, 1780.20

The Board of Treasury, stimulated by a Congressional investiga-
tion to take some action on Hopkinson’s account, finally came to a
decision, which they reported to Congress on October 27, 1780. Their

19. A copy of this manuscript is among the papers of the late Edward Hopkinson,

Esq. Some of the early pages are lost. After listing his charges against the Board of
Treasury, Hopkinson reviewed his own services to the government, the most conspicuous
of which he described thus : “I have had the Honour, an Honour which the Mines of

Peru should not purchase from me, of subscribing my Name to the original Declaration
of Independence.”

20. Papers, No. 19, Vol. Ill, fol. 177-78; see also “Journals,” XVIII, 814.

300

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

report, after giving a history of the case from the beginning, stated
that, after receiving the report made by the Commissioners of Accounts
on August 7,

“The Board proceeded to consider the said account, and on the 12th
Instant rejected it for want of vouchers to support the Charges.

“The Board beg leave further to observe that they should not have
thought themselves authorized to allow the said account, had the
Treasurer of Loans produced vouchers of his having been employed
about the several matters he charges for.

“1st because it is within the knowledge of one of the Members of
the Board that with respect to the charges of the works incidental to
the Treasury, the said Francis Hopkinson was not the only person
consulted on these exhibitions of Fancy, and therefore cannot claim
the sole merit of them and is not entitled in this respect to the full sum
charged.

“ 2dlv Because the Board are of opinion that the public is entitled
to these little assistances, given by gentlemen who enjoy a very con-
siderable Salary under Congress without Fee or further reward; and
lastly because it appears to the Board by a relation of a conversation
that passed between the said Treasurer of Loans and one of the Mem-
bers of the Board just after the said Treasurer had wrote to the
Admiralty Letter N° 1 that he viewed the success of his application
for the wine as very uncertain, and considered it in the light of a com-
pliment due to him for these Works of Fancy.”21

After having their report recommitted on September 9, the com-
mittee appointed by Congress to investigate the charges made by
Hopkinson against the Board of Treasury called another meeting of
the contending parties, at which Forman and Gibson appeared. That
the attitude of these gentlemen was far from being conciliatory is
amusingly suggested by the following paragraph in the committee’s
final report:

“ . . . . Your Committee has met with great difficulties in the
course of this Enquiry: The Commiss" of the Treasury having in
sundry instances attempted to dictate to them the manner in which
the Enquiry should be made, which has laid your Committee under the
Necessity of repeatedly enjoining the said Commissrs to forbear that
attempt & to permit the Commtto to exercise their own Judgment in
the case referred to them.”

Among the papers of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania are
some rough notes jotted down at the investigation. These notes were

21. Papers, No. 136, Vol. IV, fol. 665, (71-85; “Journals,” XVIII, 983-85.

301

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

so hastily written in the first place and are now so worn as to be almost
illegible, and they are so fragmentary that much of the contents is
unintelligible, but they nevertheless throw some light on the nature of
the investigation. They show that five charges were brought against
the Board of Treasury: (i) neglect of duty, (2) indolence, (3)

inattention to the public interest, (4) incapacity, and (5) partiality.
Defending themselves against the last of these charges, the Board cited
their demand that Hopkinson produce vouchers showing that he had
been commissioned by Congress to make the designs for which he
asked pay, as evidence of their impartiality.

“Do not they [the Commissioners of the Chamber of Accounts]
require Certificates and Vouchers from Printers Tradesmen & C to
establish their Charges? They do, and a poor Man’s account will
remain with them neglected until he furnishes the necessary vouchers.
.... Why then are these Requisites dispensed with in the Honour-
able Mr. Hopkinson’s Case?”

The final report of the committee, delivered to Congress on
November 24, 1780, after describing the insolent behavior of the
Board of Treasury, went on to say that the difficulties of the commit-
tee had been further increased by the great “Jealousies and Animosi-
ties [that had] arisen amongst the Officers of the Treasury Depart-
ment.” The committee declined to take sides in the quarrels between
the Board of Treasury and other officials of the Treasury Depart-
ment, but expressed the opinion that all the differences “might have
been readily adjusted, without the least injury to the Public, had not
the Demon of Discord pervaded the whole Department.” They
offered no suggestions about the settlement of Hopkinson’s account.
In conclusion, they declared that it was the opinion of the committee
that “the Treasury should be under the Direction of a single Officer,
accountable to Congress for the Conduct of his Department.”22

The rebuke administered by the investigating committee seems to
have had little effect on the quarrels in the Treasury Department. On
July 23, 1781, Hopkinson sent to the President of Congress a letter
in which he resigned the office of Treasurer of Loans, and gave as his
reason for doing so the unhappy differences that had too long sub-
sisted between him and the Board of Treasury. Congress accepted
the resignation on the day on which they received it.23 On the same

22. Papers, No. 19, Vol. Ill, fol. 179-82; “Journals,” XVIII, 1092.

23. Ibid., No. 78, Vol. XII, fol. 171 ; “Journals,” XXI (1912), 783.

302

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

day Robert Morris, the Financier-General, also wrote to the President
of Congress, approving Hopkinson’s resignation, but describing him
as “a Gentleman of unblemished Honour & Integrity, a faithful &
attentive Servant of the Public and steadily attached to the Ameri-
can Cause.”24 Ezekiel Forman, one of his chief opponents on the
Board of Treasury, resigned on July 24.25

On August 23, 1781, Congress passed a resolution “That the
report relative to the fancy-work of Francis Hopkinson ought not to
be acted on.”26

To anyone who has followed the history of Hopkinson’s attempt
to collect pay for his “fancy work” certain facts are clearly evident.
Francis Hopkinson in four written statements, which are still in exist-
ence, asserted that he was the author of certain devices, drawings,
mottoes, etc. The Board of Admiralty, by submitting his original
statement to Congress, indicated that they considered his assertion
worthy of consideration. The Commissioners of Accounts and the
Auditor General, by repeatedly approving his account and directing
the Board of Treasury to pay him the amount called for in his bill,
showed that they not only believed that he had made the designs in
question, but also considered his charge a reasonable one. The Board
of Treasury, on the other hand, displayed from the beginning a defi-
nite determination not to pay him. They employed ingenious devices
to delay the settlement of his account and finally submitted a report
which influenced Congress to refuse his application for remuneration.

It should be remembered, however, that during the time when
Hopkinson’s account was under consideration, the Board of Treasury
was carrying on with other officers of the Treasury Department a
general war in which the Hopkinson affair was only a minor engage-
ment. Yet this board, who were so hostile to Hopkinson that they
shut the door in his face when he came to see them about official busi-
ness, never disputed that he had made the designs for which he asked
pay, but rejected his account ( 1 ) because it was not accompanied by
vouchers, (2) because one member of the board asserted that Hop-
kinson “was not the only person consulted on these exhibitions of
Fancy,” (3) because the board believed that an official receiving a
salary from the Government should not charge a fee for “little assist-

24. Papers, No. 137, Vol. I, fol. 89.

25. “Journals,” XXI, 784.

26. Ibid., p. 899.

30 3

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

ances” like these, and (4) because a member of the board asserted
that Hopkinson had confessed to him that he “viewed the success of
his application for the wine as very uncertain.”

The very fact that Hopkinson wrote the letter to the Board of
Admiralty and later submitted the bills is in itself the strongest evi-
dence that he had made the designs. No man of sense would submit
a bill for work that he had not done, to a body of intelligent men,
some of whom were already familiar with the facts of the case, and
all of whom were able to inform themselves immediately whether or
not his statements were true. It is therefore practically certain that
Francis Hopkinson submitted to Congress “sundry drawings, devices,
and mottoes” that were accepted and used by the new government.
This fact, moreover, is important because two items in his account
raise the question whether or not he designed the seal and the flag
that were adopted as the emblems of the United States.

For designing the Great Seal, which was adopted by Congress on
June 20, 1782, the late Gaillard Hunt, Chief of the Division of Manu-
scripts in the Library of Congress, gives credit to Charles Thomson
and William Barton.27 Since Hopkinson’s account was presented two
years before this date, and since his design has not been found, we
have at present no means of determining whether or not any of his
ideas were carried out in the seal finally chosen. The flag, on the
other hand, had been adopted three years before Hopkinson wrote
his letter to the Board of Admiralty, asserting that he had in the past
exerted his abilities for the public service, to the satisfaction, as he
believed, of those whom he wished to please. This statement, if it
has any meaning at all, indicates that his designs had been accepted,
and therefore identifies “the flag of the United States of America”
mentioned in his letter of May 25, 1780, with the flag adopted by
Congress on June 14, 1777.

It was not until 1870 — ninety-three years after the adoption of
the national ensign — that the honor of having designed the flag or
any part of it was claimed by anyone except Francis Hopkinson. On
March 14 of that year William J. Canby, of Philadelphia, read before
the Historical Society of Pennsylvania a paper in which he asserted
that “his maternal grandmother, Mrs. John Ross, was the first

27. “The History of the Seal of the United States” (Washington: Government Print-
ing Office, 1909), PP- 33-40.

304

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

maker and partial designer of the stars and stripes.”28 According to
Canby’s statement, a committee of Congress consisting of General
Washington, Colonel George Ross and Robert Morris, in June, 1776,
waited upon Mrs. Ross, who was in the upholstering business in
Philadelphia, and asked her to make them a flag from a rather roughly
drawn design which they had brought with them. After examining
the sketch, she made some suggestions, the most important of which
were (1) that the flag, which in the drawing was square, “should be
one third longer than its width; (2) that the stars which were scat-
tered promiscuously over the field .... should be in lines, or in
some adopted form, as a circle or star”; and (3) that five-pointed
stars (in heraldry, mullets or spur rowels) should be substituted for
the six-pointed stars in the drawing. “The gentlemen agreed with
her that five points would look better, but [suggested] that the six-
pointed star would be easier to make. She then showed them how a
five-pointed star could be made with a single clip of the scissors.”29
According to Rear Admiral Hanford, William Canby said that his
grandmother had told him this story when he was eleven years old,
and that three of Mrs. Ross’ daughters and one of her nieces, all
living in 1870, had confirmed it.30 Dr. Balderston, on the other hand,
asserts that William Canby’s account was dictated to him by his
Aunt Clarissa Sidney Wilson, the eldest daughter of Betsy Ross and
her successor in the upholstering business, and that it was supported
by the affidavits of Betsy Ross’ daughter, Rachel Fletcher, her grand-
daughter, Sophia Hildebrandt, and her niece, Margaret Boggs, all
of whom had heard the story from Betsy Ross herself.31

28. Rear Admiral Franklin Hanford (1844-1928), “Did Betsy Ross Design the Flag

of the United States of America?” (Scottsdale, N. Y. : Privately printed by Stella

Harmon, 1921 ) , p. 8. This little study, which is documented and furnished with a bibliog-
raphy, exposes some of the myths that have grown out of the Betsy Ross legend.

29. Lloyd Balderston, Ph. D., “The Evolution of the American Flag” (Philadelphia:
Ferris & Leach, 1909), pp. 47-49, 103-12. Dr. Balderston, who died in 1933, was a
nephew of William J. Canby. His book contains the evidence which the latter and Inis
brother, George Canby, gathered in support of the Betsy Ross legend.

30. Hanford, op. cit.

31. Balderston, op. cit., pp. 108-19. Dr. Balderston quotes the three affidavits men-
tioned above, and also the affidavits of ten other persons who had heard the story from
witnesses who declared that they had heard it from Betsy Ross (pp. 123-30). I have not
seen William J. Canby’s paper. Dr. Balderston was under the impression that it is in the
library of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania (p. 109), but the librarian, Mr. Julian P.
Boyd, in a letter to me written on February 8, 1939, says, “Although our Manuscripts
Department has made a search for it, we find that we do not possess the manuscript of
the article and the address was never printed.” John L. Balderston, the eminent journal-
ist and playwright, who is a son of Dr. Balderston, and who has most obligingly fur-
nished me a number of interesting details of the Betsy Ross legend, informed me in a
letter written on March 21, 1939, that William J. Canby’s paper is probably in his mother’s
safety deposit vault in Wilmington, Delaware.

305

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

Elizabeth Griscom, who was later to become the heroine of a
famous legend and the subject of much controversy, was the daughter
of Samuel and Rebecca James Griscom. She was born on January i,
1752. In November, 1773, she married John Ross, of New Castle
on the Delaware, who was a nephew of Colonel George Ross, one of
the signers of the Declaration of Independence. George Ross furnished
cannon balls and other military stores to the Continental Army. John
Ross, who was a soldier in the militia, while guarding some of these
stores, was killed by an explosion of gunpowder, on January 21,
177 6.32

John Ross was by trade an upholsterer, and after his marriage
he opened a shop on Arch Street in Philadelphia. His widow con-
tinued in the upholstering business, even after her second marriage to
Joseph Ashburn, in 1777, and her third to John Claypoole, in 1783.
For fifty years she was known as an expert needle-woman, lace maker,
and flag maker.33 After her death in 1836, the business was con-
ducted until 1857 by the eldest of her four daughters by John Clay-
poole,34 Clarissa Sidney Wilson ( 1785-1864) . 35

The original Betsy Ross story, then, is very simple. William J.
Canby in 1870 asserted that his grandmother, in June, 1776, “shortly
before the Declaration of Independence,”36 made the first American
flag, from a design submitted to her by a committee of Congress and
changed in some particulars at her suggestion. In view of the fact
that the making of flags was a branch of Mrs. Ross’ business, her
grandson’s statement would be entirely credible had he not asserted
that the event occurred in June, 177 6, a year before the adoption of
the flag and some days, at least, before the Declaration of Independ-

32. George H. Genzmer, “Betsy Ross,’’ “Dictionary of American Biography,” XVI
(New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1935), pp. 174-75.

33. Minutes of the Pennsylvania State Navy Board, published in the “Pennsylvania

Archives,” Second Series, I (Harrisburg: Lane S. Hart, State Printer, 1879), 164,

record that on May 29, 1777, the Paymaster of the Pennsylvania Fleet was ordered to
pay to Elizabeth Ross fourteen pounds, twelve shillings, and two pence, “for making
Ship’s Colours &c.”

34. By her marriage with Joseph Ashburn Elizabeth Griscom had two daughters, one
of whom lived to maturity (Lloyd Balderston, op. cit., p. 105).

35. Hanford, op. cit., pp. 5-7; Lloyd Balderston, op. cit., pp. 103-10. John L. Balder-
ston, in the letter mentioned above, informs me that there is still some of Mrs. Wilson’s
bunting at his family homestead at Colora, Maryland, and that Admiral Byrd carried a
piece of this bunting on one of his historic flights. “It was a tradition in our family,”
says Mr. Balderston, “that all children, as soon as they were old enough, were taught to
cut a five-pointed star, in memory of old Betsy’s story, and I remember being taught this,

probably about 1893 I knew George Canby as a boy and have heard him tell the

story as he got it from Betsy Ross’s daughter.”

36. Lloyd Balderston, op. cit., p. in.

3°6

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

ence; and were it not for the fact that the “Journals of Congress”
make no mention of any committee appointed to supervise the making
of a flag. These discrepancies and others which I cannot discuss here
have caused historians to question practically every detail of William
Canby’s statement and have tended to discredit the whole story. On
the other hand, the minutes of the Pennsylvania State Navy Board
for May 29, 1777, establish the fact that Mrs. Ross did make flags;
and since Pennsylvania had no State flag previous to 1799, the colors
mentioned in these minutes may have included the national ensign.37
It is therefore not improbable that she actually did make some of the
first flags used in Philadelphia. The Betsy Ross legend, which has
given scholars a problem that they have never solved to the complete
satisfaction of anyone,38 immediately fired the popular imagination.
Many patriotic writers repeated the story and embellished it with
details from their own imaginations. Thus they soon created a sen-
timental myth, which is every year repeated to the school children of
this country, which is accepted by the majority of Americans almost
as an article of religious faith, and which will probably be dissemi-
nated by patriotic societies until the end of time.39

The Betsy Ross legend tends both to refute and support Hopkin-
son’s assertion that he designed the flag. It is very improbable that
a man who had studied art, who had designed seals, and who had even
painted portraits40 should have made a design so rough and clumsy
as that described by William J. Canby. On the other hand, Elizabeth
Ross has been frequently quoted as saying that the stars in the origi-
nal design had six points; 41 on the Hopkinson coat-of-arms are three
six-pointed stars.42

Whoever may have been the designer of the national ensign, the
evolution of the design itself can be pretty definitely traced. Before
the Revolution the Colonies, of course, used the flag of the Mother
Country, but after the Americans rose in armed rebellion against
England, the use of the English flag by the army or navy became
confusing and dangerous. Accordingly, other flags, such as the Bunker

37. Lloyd Balderston, op. cit., p. 57; John L. Balderston, op. cit., quoting “The Penn-
sylvania Manual” (Harrisburg: State Printing Office, 1929), p. 242.

38. For a conservative discussion of the problem see George H. Genzmer, op. cit.

39. See Hanford, op. cit., pp. 8-19.

40. He made a very good copy of his own portrait by Robert E. Pine. See Hastings,
op. cit., pp. 465-66.

41. Lloyd Balderston, op. cit., pp. 48, 113-14, 116, 124.

42. Hastings, op. cit., p. 256.

307

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

Hill Flag,43 the Rhode Island Flag, the Pine Tree Flag, and the Rat-
tlesnake Flag were adopted by various colonies during the early days
of the war.44

Of all the flags that were in use before the adoption of the stars
and stripes the one that came nearest to being a “national” banner
was that hoisted by John Paul Jones on the “Alfred,” on December
3, 1775, and by General Washington at Cambridge on January 2,
1776. This flag, variously known as the Congress Colors, the First
Navy Ensign, the Grand Union Flag, and the Cambridge Flag, had
thirteen stripes, possibly copied from the Merchant Ensign or “striped
flag” used by American merchant vessels and privateers; and a blue
canton, emblazoned with the crosses of St. Andrew and St. George
like that in the British marine flag of the day.45

After the Declaration of Independence, further use of the British
flag became obviously improper, but it was not until nearly a year
later, on June 14, 1777, that Congress passed the resolution providing
that the flag adopted should contain thirteen stripes, alternate red
and white, and a union of thirteen white stars in a blue field. Con-
gress did not direct a specific arrangement of the thirteen stars, but
in the navy it became customary to arrange them in horizontal rows
of 32323, thus outlining the crosses that they replaced.46

The “Journals of Congress” contain no specific information about
the origin of the flag resolution, but we have reason to believe that
it came from some one connected with the navy. Since the colors are
a part of the necessary equipment of a ship, it seems probable that
the naval branch of the service would be the first to feel the need of
a new ensign and would take steps to secure one. That the resolution
came from this department is strongly indicated by the fact that in
the “Journals of Congress” it is preceded by one and followed by three
resolutions reported by the Marine Committee.47 When we remem-
ber that Francis Hopkinson, who three years later asserted that he
had designed “the flag of the United States of America,” was on June
14, 1 777> chairman of the Navy Board acting under the Marine Com-
mittee, the position of the flag resolution in the midst of resolutions

43. McCandless, op. cit., pp. 338, 344.

44. R. C. Ballard Thruston, “The Origin and Evolution of the United States Flag”
(Washington: Government Printing Office, 1926), pp. 1-8.

45. McCandless, op. cit., pp. 288-89, 295, 338-39, 344, 352; Thruston, op. cit., pp. 8-9.

46. McCandless, op. cit., pp. 306, 310.

47. The fourth of these five resolutions provides that Captain John Paul Jones be
appointed to command the Continental ship of war, the “Ranger.”

308

FRANCIS HOPKINSON AND THE AMERICAN FLAG

reported by the Marine Committee becomes doubly significant. More-
over, it should be remembered that Hopkinson’s letter of May 25,
1780, was addressed to the Board of Admiralty. Finally the lan-
guage of Hopkinson’s various statements fixes the identity of the flag
that he had designed and indicates the purpose for which he had
designed it. In his letter of May 25 he called it “the flag of the
United States of America”; in the statement submitted on June 6
he called it “The Great Naval Flag of the United States” ; and in the
two statements of June 24 he called it “The Naval Flag of the
States,” and “The Naval Flag of the United States.” The first letter
shows clearly that the national ensign is meant; the three accounts
indicate that the flag was first designed for the navy.

One more fact may be cited as further evidence of the authenticity
of Hopkinson’s claim. His letter of May 25, 1780, begins, “It is
with great Pleasure that I understand that my last Device of a Seal
for the Board of Admiralty has met with your Honours Approbation.”
This seal, which was adopted on March 4, 1780, is described as hav-
ing “thirteen bars mutually supporting each other, alternate red and
white, in a blue field and surmounting an anchor proper.”48

In conclusion, I wish to emphasize strongly one point that has
already been made. Of all the persons who have been named as pos-
sible designers of the flag, Francis Hopkinson is the only one who
himself asserted, in documents now in existence and accessible to every-
one, that he designed it. This assertion he made to men to whom
the facts were known or by whom they were easily ascertainable.
Some members of the Board of Treasury doubtless objected to his
receiving pay for his work because they were hostile to him; some
may have conscientiously believed that no charges should be made for
artistic labors, which they called “fancy work”; some may have
thought that an officer drawing a salary from the government should
not be paid special fees. None of them objected to his receiving pay-
ment because they believed that he had not made the designs men-
tioned in his statements. And so I am convinced that, in the light of
the evidence discovered so far, the credit for having designed the
Stars and Stripes must be awarded to Francis Hopkinson.

48. “Journals,” XVI (1910), 412. I have found in the “Journals of Congress” little
information about the other devices mentioned by Hopkinson. On September 26, 1778, a
resolution was passed that a committee be appointed “to prepare seals for the treasury
and for the navy,” and on February 24, 1779, it was ordered that the Marine Commit-
tee be instructed to report .... “forms of proper commissions, ship papers, and the
like” ; but what designs were chosen and when they were adopted I have been unable to
learn. See “Journals,” XII (1908), 961, and XIII (1909), 246.

309

V oyage of tke Skip Packet Xo Soutk
America and Ckma, 1817

(From, the Journal of Captain Samuel Hill , Written at Sea)
Edited by James Wilbert Snyder, Jr., New York University

HE manuscript from which the following account is tran-
scribed may be found in the New York Public Library,
together with the author’s earlier journal of the “Ophelia”
and his autobiography. All three are important docu-
ments concerning the old China trade, since Captain Hill served not
only as master of the “Packet” but also as her supercargo. A native
of Washington County, Maine, he had sailed every sea known to
commerce, and at the time of this venture has just returned to Bos-
ton from an eighteen months’ voyage to Canton.1

In the journal Captain Hill describes the voyage and also the
manner of carrying on trade, both in South America and in Canton.
It illustrates well an early phase of the Latin America trade. The
voyage took five years and included additional trips between Canton
and South American ports before returning by the Cape of Good
Hope. Circumnavigating the earth was merely an incident in the
business at hand. The owner’s instructions were necessarily broad
and left much to the discretion of the captain. He was warned to
avoid danger of capture, and if asked, to give his destination as the
Northwest Coast. Ports of call were suggested, and the nature of
the cargo, and the ship was to be “loaded so deep as to sink all the
wales in the water but one.” In the excerpts of the journal which
follow much detail concerning navigation, and some other material
such as description of South American political activities has been
deleted as indicated. This was necessitated by lack of space; other-
wise the journal is presented as he left it.

Introductory Remarks — Ever since my departure from Valparaiso
de Chili, I had determined to undertake another voyage to that coun-

i. A brief sketch of Captain Hill’s life may be found in Mr. Snyder’s introduction to
the “Journal of the Ophelia,” in the “New England Quarterly,” for June, 1937.

310

.ZJo

~'W\

fity/ 1 t^CS^rr/ris Cct // A/l- A oAu/Al

3t^l«^Co^V

^ £4^4£-~*+>t**. Cs4L >^V^, V Jjfc

^/r<^A£r~ A ^ A^A/gui*^ 4^^

\^+- //e*y*S<*/ /(L ^ 4/±j£Zk,Si^*C '\y{/ldt>ri+£s **sfo. cs<s x/A-*

tX/A~s ,/r tA*, <?rAss //A^/^^xu/ziz^

V^pc*: l/Z. ~//trx*Z. J'tJLrcxf AT.//z V/Jy'/S^) Ax^

€*~*^tcA -4^*. /£t- ^AkA2A. (/av/ As+x-*z. <^.*s4?<£. ^4x^4^. zz+.* &,£*■**./- 23 ^ 2* 4#^

/ <- /l^ ' ^^*4^. ^«//" ^*>/^., ■ /^*^v" />fe/C

2 +/V LA>£c~/£t rZy ,£.4.'2^,a/s > rtrey^S (Z^^yy^vryypAA tMj. ^4^/ZCc, d/tC

hu*^ '. y. ^ ^Xu/y ». 4</« jXX^* 33 s/fatT&£ frtAX^^~ Z^y#

/*-«-<» /r #». x-At^Zelc^c -Xtsvr/C ^/Zj cJXa^Z/x/ . <2 hV A-^. c^-^Zt^gy

/Xt7-t~ 4, ft A /Ac Sc^/XX> y £/*-?*- /X^t^>a &~/C4r< -XX^+^CAO^yd^/fc^

$iX(tt/A «vy6*-<^ /Aj^-^xC ^V. fi4^ rT S* rzur»-/Xfc f/L- /LrrtfZ y/ ’XtbJ/r' « ■

// <,/ £. \^Zlx.C-/t l^4rnx t/^^-<t«/ .^rr /^t, / * *- Xu// 3/ •

. _*,<*^- V'<s- ; Ae/Dr* *%. 'A.S. / Ou***/ c^. //) ^r, 4/ c^m > Z<222) Jt//cZc

A jX<^tAc> /£r?6/ /i'Cu>2c<X- y^r-7^ Ae^//-/ fort/. />ey<-S
/& /£+-/ /uyAJe y/r/c (jyCLtff 'fotrvtJ, / Ar/C C u< <rzjA v/t /v^/V^tL

<ul/ $/X&^c/.rC C/*S<_ t'n u /e £?/<&& 1 1 t? rS/i Z eMSj i_^

/< & /s

///>

<f-/C S*+-tv C>£^.//--<r .<?/. ©4^^^

« ^ — >V3r .

ir °/l<i frt- / j ^:. /J. / „ 23 J3

- , ,. * ~ 2f.~.

(y //•(-*-•»" -

.%*>-. Zfo-r, ssmm/A ^ m. • .^y.M-^ucj)^/ou^/ y^/, ^-j£ 2)*',-r/tr‘Z/. f/.M ir/ At

z2/t*. ... .'/. ^4- /. ^«-m4 ^ ^

£/y-* > />. /Jy/y,rr~&A*z^.

^Itorr Vjf~*£y i/r/it. i

Vi+^L. /y./t-Jc r}tJy3aM'&

//jyaAs yi/r

/i^OUL

Af.~.

Ji//l4*~*-

AttP/e/ 2^L>i^aTC^.t>V/4^,<»4

A /i- j: _

aJ./y./^-A

At*/'

/o /fT/Z. .

/&+*%*

2c. fo .

at*. .

/*. ^

A**

/-■

/ V

FROM THE JOURNAL OF THE “PACKET” IN THE NEW YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET”

try provided a suitable ship & outfit, with a cargo adequate to the
business could be obtained

About the beginning of May (1817) I obtained an interview with
the Honorable Israel Thorndike,2 who entertained a favorable opin-
ion of the voyage and after some further conversation with me, he
very honorably agreed to purchase and equip a suitable ship for the
voyage in question, and also to furnish a capital of fifty to sixty thou-
sand dollars, with proposals to receive on subscription a further sum
to make up a cargo of one hundred and fifty or more thousand dol-
lars Col. Thorndike purchased the ship “Packet” of Boston,

and about the 28th of May I took charge of her A schedule

of an agreement was drawn up and handed to different merchants for
the subscription of stock for the cargo, which was soon obtained to a
very considerable amount. The terms were as follows, to wit, The
ship owners to furnish a suitable ship equipped, victualed, manned,
and armed for a voyage of eighteen months in such manner as should
be satisfactory to myself. The stock or goods subscribed by shippers,
to be put on board at their account and risk, and invoiced at the fair
and just cash price in the market, less the debenture on all goods
entitled thereto, and at the true costs of importation on the original
invoices of all goods on which the debentures were expired. Two and
a half per cent, commissions for effecting sales in South America and
two and a half per cent, on the investment in Canton, to be deducted,
and all other incidental charges for effecting the business of sales
and purchases abroad.

At the return of the property to the United States the goods to
be sold at auction and the original amount of stock shipped, if sold
for so much, and one half the net profits to belong to the shippers,
and one half the net profits to belong to the owners of the ship in
lieu of freight out and home.

On completing the cargo the amount of goods shipped by the
Honorable Israel Thorndike amounted to One Hundred Thousand
dollars, and the residue being that of the shippers goods to about

2. Israel Thorndike was formerly a partner in the firm of Brown & Thorndike,
founded by Moses Brown in 1777. He continued the business alone after 1800. In addi-
tion. to conducting his business with the East, which made him one of America’s early
millionaires, Colonel Thorndike was active socially and politically, serving many terms in
the State Legislature. He was born in Beverly of parents who, though poor, were
descended from the original settlers of Ipswich. His papers are in the Baker Library,
Harvard University.

31 1

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET”

seventy thousand dollars, making an aggregate of one hundred and
seventy thousand dollars besides the ship and outfits being about
twenty five thousand dollars more, which with private adventures
made the whole exceed two hundred thousand dollars.

The ship “Packet” was built at Newburg in the State of Massa-
chusetts in 1 8 io as per register. Her length on deck 95 feet one
inch, breadth at the main beam 25 feet eleven inches. Depth of hold,
12 feet 11 inches, burthen two hundred eighty one tons 15/9 5 ths.
She was on the present occasion furnished with every necessary arti-
cle of outfit, mounted eight guns, viz., six long six pounders and two
long nine pounders and manned with a complement of thirty-one offi-
cers and seamen. It had been one of my preliminary conditions with
my owners that I should have the entire control and management of
my business, or the business of the voyage from the commencement to
its conclusion

The owners goods, as also the goods of the shippers which com-
posed our cargo outward was wholly selected by myself agreeable to
samples brought by me from South America and conformable to what
I conceived to be the general style and taste of the inhabitants of Chili
and Peru, and no one article of goods was received from the shippers,
without first having been examined and approved by me.

The cargo3 being completed and stowed and the ship in other
respects ready for sea, with the exception of the guns and implements
belonging to them, the ship was hauled in the stream and moored on
the 30th of June and at 4:00 P. M. of the first of July she was got
under weigh with a pilot on board and proceeded to Nantasket Roads
where she was moored

On Saturday the 5th July, nautical time, at 2:00 P. M., I

embarked All hands were busily employed in clearing the

decks and putting things in order for sea

The sixth .... being the forty first anniversary of American
Independence a full allowance of grog was served to all hands with
fresh beef & pudding for dinner. At 5 :oo A. M. we unmoored and
got under weigh with a very light southwest wind and some fog. At
7 :20 A. M. passed the light house, and set all close hauled sail at
N. E. and N. E. B. N

3. Dry goods, jewelry, furniture, crockery, hats, iron, steel, brandy and other articles.
312

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET’

Departure from Cape Ann, Passage of the North Atlantic — With
pleasant weather and a fine breeze at south and south by east our
course was held down the bay at East half South per compass. The
sea was smooth and regular with a light haze near the horizon. At
2 hrs. 30 mins. P. M. Thachers Island lights bore north half East
per compass dist. 4 or 5 miles. From this point our departure was
taken. Latter part of the day we had some fog. No observation
for the latitude

When we arrived near the Cape de Verde Islands the wind which
for several days previous had been steady in the E. N. E. quarter, now
veered to the N. E. and north where it continued until we reached the

1 2th degree of north latitude On the 12th at daylight a ship

was observed about six miles astern of us directly in our wake, stand-
ing on in chase of us under a press of sail, the wind at S. S. W., a
moderate top gallant breeze and we were standing close hauled on
the western course. The ship evidently gained on us very consider-
ably until 8 :oo o’clock, when the guns were run aft to alter the trim
of the ship and the sails well trimmed after which we soon left her

and at noon she was fairly out of sight On the 31st strong

breezes from S. E. and a heavy sea from the S. S. W. Many cape
pigeons and some albatrosses hovering around the ship

Sept. 13th .... our route .... lay along that part of the
Patagonian coast between Cape Corientes and the Gulf of St. George,
and I cannot help remarking that during four several voyages towards
Cape Horn, when passing this section of the coast I never escaped a
series of heavy gales which invariably have abated when I arrived
as far south as the Cabo de los Desvelos of the Spaniards

There are probably many deep Bays & Inlets on the above sec-
tion of the coast, and I am strongly inclined to believe it is the finest
part of the whole Southern coast

Sept. 24th We ranged along the coast of Tierra del Fuego

at a distance of four to seven miles from the main land The

coast of Tierra del Fuego, from the False Cape Horn to the York-
minster Islands in the entrance of the Canal de Navidad, is composed
of a chain of Rock Precipices indented with many coves, Inlets & Bays,
of a considerable depth, some of which it is probable communicate

with the Strait of Magellan On the whole I think I have not

seen a section of any coast which presented a view quite so dreary

313

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET1

and inhospitable, although I have seen most of the exposed Sea coasts

on our globe between the Latitude of sixty north and 5 6 south

30th Sept the ship we saw last evening spoke us, proved

the Beaver of New York, Richd. Cleveland, 89 days out

During the passage from Cape Horn to Valpo. I suffered severely
from a violent attack of Inflamatory Sore throat which prevented me
from making observations for the Longitude & variation most of the

passage

Oct. g ... . Steered a course to keep well to the westward of
the coast for fear of falling in with Spanish Vessels which I had some
apprehensions of Hauled up for the point of Angles until

within 6 or 7 miles and brought the Bay of Valp0 open with the
church of Almindral S. E. B. E. Nearly calm. A Brig standing out
of port tow’d us induced me to haul off until her character was ascer-
tained. She fired several shots at us but without effect, as we could
evidently outsail her. The breeze freshened from the S. W. The
patriot flag was plainly perceived to be flying on the Forts on shore
and also on the Brig in chase of us. But as I had some suspicion of
its being used as a deception I thought best to satisfy myself before I
was in their power. We accordingly put everything in the best state
for defense that we could and shotted our guns and being ready we
tacked and stood towards her. She still kept firing shot at us. When
I had got nearly within range of his shot I hauled up courses and
rounded too. He came up and hailed us and sent his boat and
informed that she was the Brig “Eagle” of the Patriot Gov’t, and
came out to reconoitre us suspecting us to be a Spanish Ship. On a
nearer examination such was her force and equipment that I am con-
fidently of opinion we could have beat her off and escaped with ease.
The Commander Mr. Redmond Morris, however, apologized for
having fired shot at us when we were standing towards him and on
the whole behaved very civilly. We both made sail and stood in to
port together where we arrived and anchored at midnight. Thus by
the peculiar blessing of Divine Providence having arrived at our first
port of destination in one hundred and five days from Nantasket
Roads, Boston Harbour, all well on board, and having suffered no
accident or casualty whatever.

At 10:00 A. M. the following morning we were visited by the
Command1 of the Resguardos from the Aduana as is customary and

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET’

several other persons from the shore. The visiting officer required
agreeably to the laws that I should report my intention to unload and
sell the cargo or otherwise within twenty four hours. But I informed
him I should wait on the governor and request time to inform myself
of the state of the market etc., before I could determine on future
operations, and in order thereto I should wish to write to my friends
in Santiago and advise with them before I could come to any conclu-
sions respecting the discharge of my cargo here 4

On the 2 ist Mr. Solar arrived from Santiago and after a whole
day’s conference with him, I determined to unload my cargo and
endeavor to effect a sale of it in Chili. Although the prices of
goods was low, the duties imposed by the Government very high
(34/^ per cent) and from the large amount of goods lately thrown
in to the market by the capture of the “Pearl,” and the arrival of the
“Lion” the prices might reasonably be expected to fall still lower than
at present. These were weighty considerations to induce me to
attempt a sale of my cargo on the coast of Peru. But on the other hand
when I took into consideration the extreme danger of capture from
the Spanish ships of war of which there were five in service on the
coast, and two of them very fast sailors, and that my departure and
destination would probably be known to them, as the Port of Valp0
was blockaded by the Benganza Frigate on the 2d day after my arrival,
I concluded on the whole it would be the best and safest course to
effect a sale the best manner I could in Chili. And after enquiring at
Santiago and obtaining a promise from the Collector General that I
should have the right to reship any part of my cargo which I should
find on trial unsaleable, free of duties, I determined to unload in
Valp0.

On the 27th commenced discharging cargo, and storing it in the
custom house stores in Valp0 and on the 30th finished discharging,
made immediate arrangements for despatching the goods to Santiago
on mules and carts. On the 6th of Nov. got it all on the road and
departed on the 7th on horseback for Santiago accompanied by Mr.
Robinson (Captain’s Clerk)

4. “Ships lying in the harbour were the Br. Frigate ‘Amphion,’ Com. Bowles, 18
months from home. Amer. Schr. ‘Adeline,’ Bush, of and from Philadelphia via Buenos
Ayres with arms, ammunition etc. Amer. Ship ‘Ida,’ Dorr, of Boston, from Boston via
Gibraltar with specie dollars. Patriot Gov’t Brig ‘Eagle,’ Morris and English Brig name
unknown. Also the Spanish Ship ‘Perla’ with a valuable cargo, prize to the Chilian Brig.
‘Eagle.’ (Oct. 20 arrived the Ship ‘Lion,’ Capt. Townsend, 104 days from Providence
with a cargo of India and other goods.)”

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET”

On the 25th received accounts of the capture of the “Beaver”
and “Canton,” by the Spanish Gov’t, in Talcahuane, where it seems
they entered voluntarily having been deceived by the Patriot Flag
hoisted on the forts.

On the 29th arrived at Valp0 the American ship “Bengal” of and
from Philadelphia, Captain Ansley, Daniel W. Frost supercargo, dry
goods, tobacco and crates, etc

November 19. Made a sale of goods to Messrs. D. A. Barros,
Balero and Beranella about 60,000 dollars, payable in 30 days. These
men were considered among the best purchasers in the city for ability
and punctuality in payment.

November 27. Sold to Ambrosio Aldunati goods amounting to
20,000 dollars

On the 1 8th (December), I rode to Valparaiso in company with
Messrs. Solar, Campbell and others, where I found that most of my
ships crew had deserted and joined the several Privateers then fitting
out under the Patriot flag, and such was the inducement offered to
seamen that almost every ship in port had lost nearly all hands by
desertion. Those ships who were about to sail for Rio Janerio and
other places were under the necessity of giving most extravagant
wages for seamen to man their ships

May 29. Arrived the United States ship “Ontario,” Captain
Biddle.

June 16. Two citizens were murdered last evening in the Ala-
meyda and the offenders were taken.

June 20. Five men were shot for robbery and murder.

June 23. J. Higginson Esquire, late Supercargo of the ship
“Levant” of Boston has been appointed to command of the
Chilian Frigate “Lantarro” (to replace Captain O’Brien, killed in
Action)

From the 12th to the 14th (August) heavy rains, during this
time I was occupied in closing my accounts and making preparations
for my departure for Coquimbo and thence to Canton in China. Mr.
Robinson was left in charge of the stores at Santiago and the store
rent was fixed at 36 dollars per month .... having got my clearance
for the ship I prepared to depart from Santiago. On the 21st August
I left Santiago and arrived at Valparaiso on the 22d, where I found

316

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET”

the ship “Packet” in forwardness for sea, and wanting little more

than a crew of seamen to put her in readiness for sea

Departure from Valparaiso and Passage to Coquimbo — On Fri-
day the nth September at 8 too A. M. we weighed anchor and stood

out to sea from Valparaiso Bay

At 4:00 P. M. of the 14th we arrived and anchored in Coquimbo
Harbour in 10 faths. on a bottom of sand and mud about ^ths of a

mile from the shore At Coquimbo I met Mr. Worthington, U. S.

Consul, at the house of Mr. Daniel W. Frost and several other gen-

tlemen whom I had known at Santiago This Port (Coquimbo)

is the great mart of Chili for copper The inhabitants are

estimated at six thousand The government here demand of

every ship 25 dollars for anchorage, at Valparaiso it is but ten

At 3:00 P. M. on Saturday the 19th of September we weighed
anchor from the Port of Coquimbo and stood to sea, bound to the
Sandwich Islands distant 5680 miles on a course north 58° 20' west.
.... On this passage we had generally fine weather and brisk South

Easterly winds until we arrived near the Equinoctial line We

took the regular Northeast trade wind which continued quite up to
the Sandwich Islands

We arrived off Owhyee [Hawaii], near the East Point at 8:00
P. M. of the 23rd of October and the night being dark and squally
stood under short sail until the morning when under a deluge of rain

we crowded all sail round the Northeast side of the Island

Having obtained a supply of firewood and a few of the most mis-
erable pigs which I ever saw at these Islands, and a quantity of vege-
tables etc. On Saturday November 7, at 6 :oo P. M. we weighed and
sailed from Woahoo [Oahu] and anchored in Whymea [Waimea]
Bay, Atooi [Kauai] at noon of the same day .... went on shore
and visited the King Tamooeru, and the principal chief who is an
agent of Tamahahmahah5 and whose name is Tamahowrehernanch —
Tamooeru who is now absolutely no more than 40 years of age, has
every appearance of a man 70 years old and appears to be rapidly
declining. He has led generally a very intemperate life by indulging
to an excess in smoking tobacco, taking the ava, and keeping a num-
ber of females.

At the Island of Woahoo we left the following ships and vessels,

5. Kamehameha I, King of Hawaii from 1809 to his death in 1819.

317

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET’

viz., Ship “Mentor” of Boston, Suter,6 just arrived from the coast of
Northwest America with furs bound to Canton, has made a good
voyage

Ship “Sultan”7 of Boston, Reynolds, late from the Marquesas, with
sandalwood, bound on to Canton very soon

Lying up Brig “Forester,” and ship hulk “Albatros,” owned by
Tamahahmahah. Destination, to rot.

At the island of Atooi, Ship “Enterprise” of New York, Ebbets,
taking in sandalwood, bound to Canton. Captain William Davis8
was at Woahoo, waiting hourly the arrival of the Brig “Cossock”
from California, and ship “Eagle” and schooner “San Martin,” from
Sitka and Okotsk, and intends proceeding to Canton shortly.

Pigs and vegetables were scarce and dear at these Islands. San-
dalwood plenty, nominal price io dollars per pecul 133 pounds.

Samuel Prince Jr. of Boston was residing at the Sandwich Islands
in the capacity of Agent for William H. Davis, Esquire

Departure from Sandwich Islands to Canton — At 8 :oo A. M. of
Monday, November 9th, we weighed and stood out to Sea between
Atooi and Oweehow [Niihau], bound to Canton

On the 8th (December) at daylight we were close in with Men-
doza Island off Takai Point and steering W. S. W. Soon after saw
the Tannary Islands. At 10:00 A. M. entered the Lima Passage and
made all sail with a fine breeze, but at noon foggy weather and calms

detained us near Rat Island On the 10th despatched Mr.

Nowell and officer in a Chinese boat to Macao for a Pilot for the
River, while we were boating the ship over to the Nine Islands against
a strong westerly gail, in order that we might lose no time in waiting

for a pilot Soon after Mr. Nowell returned on board with

a river pilot from Macao. While we were waiting the turn of the

6. Captain John Suter, one of the most successful of the “Nor’westmen,” commanded
such famous vessels as the “Pearl,” “Atahualpa” and “Cleopatra’s Barge.” His connec-
tion with Bryant and Sturgis is indicated in the Bryant and Sturgis manuscripts, some
of which are printed in S. E. Morison’s “Boston Traders in the Hawaiian Islands,” Mas-
sachusetts Historical Society “Proceedings,” Vol. LIV. A sketch of him is given in
S. E. Morison: “Maritime History of Massachusetts,” pp. 70-73.

7. One account book of this ship is in the Baker Library.

8. William H. Davis was former commander of the ship “Isabella,” owned by Board-
man and Pope, of Boston. He was engaged in the sandalwood trade and remained in
Hawaii himself for many years. He married the daughter of Oliver Holmes, Massachu-
setts shipmaster. Their son, William H. Davis, Jr., was born at Honolulu in 1822, and
became a California pioneer. Morison, “Boston Traders in the Hawaiian Islands,”
op. cit.

318

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET”

tide the ships “Canton” of Boston and “Lion” of Providence both
passed us under full sail bound home to the United States .... on
Monday the 14th at midnight arrived and anchored in Whampoa
Roads. At 10:00 A. M. went up to Canton .... and hired a fac-
tory for the season I might remain in Canton, of Benjamin C. Wilcocks
Esquire, American Consul at Canton at 500 dollars.

Immediately informed myself of the opinions of my owners by his
letters received and of the state of the market and lost no time in issu-
ing orders for silks wanted both for the home market and also for
South America.

My contract for the manufacture of goods was made with Pagnan
and Namching, and Pagnan secured the ship. On the 24th the goods
for the Boston market were finished and ready for shipping and on
the 28th were on board the “Ospray” of Salem, Captain Stephen
Brown, bound to Boston. Freight for silk goods at 85 dollars per
ton. But the goods wanted for Chili were not finished until the 28th
of April 1819. The cause of this delay was it seems the difficulty of
making the figured goods and although they had engaged to furnish
them by the 10th of March at farthest, yet it seemed the merchants
were disappointed by the weavers, and at the time when they informed
me of their disappointment it was too late to remedy the business by
ordering goods of another kind, I was obliged to determine either
on leaving my goods, or wait and have them finished according to the
patterns given. I determined on the latter, and the only consolation to
be derived from this tedious delay, was that of having the wind and
weather more favorable for my passage.

On Thursday the 6th of May at 5 :oo P. M., I left Canton and

proceeded to Whampoa, arrived on board at 9 :oo P. M The

wind was at E. N. E. moderate. At 10:00 A. M. worked down to
Junk River and anchored

At daylight of the 7th of August we made a small low Island on

the Lee Bord bearing south by west This Island which I

believe to be the Whitsunday Isle of Cook, or Wallis is about three
miles from north to south .... covered with green bushes and one
conspicuous tree directly on the Northwest point at the foot of the
largest hill and near this is the residence of the Inhabitants. The
rest of the Island is not more than 20 feet above the level of the sea
or possibly 30 feet, is covered with bushes, except the beach which is

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET”

a margin of white sand. The shores are formed of a line of coral
reefs which appear like a perpendicular wall on all that side which
came within my view

On the 5th of September at 8 in the evening the land was in sight
on the Coast of Chili a few miles south of Point Couromilla ....
at 3:00 P. M. (6 September) arrived and anchored in Valparaiso.
.... I commenced discharging cargo, but owing to the very unjust
and illiberal conduct of the Governor of Valparaiso who seemed
determined to throw every possible impediment in my way, and also
the pernicious and destructive practice of the Customs House Officers
in Valparaiso of opening and unpacking all goods landed in Valparaiso
before they could be forwarded to Santiago I was under the absolute
necessity of making a journey to Santiago where I procured an order
from the Supreme Director to have my goods exempted from the
Regulations on condition that I should pay a certain number of guards
to accompany the wagons on which my goods were conducted to San-
tiago .... to prevent the goods from being smuggled on the road.

On the 20th of September the cargo was all dispatched on carts
and on the Road to Santiago and I had discharged the ships crew with
the exception of five or six men to take care of the ship with the offi-
cers. Having arranged everything in the most prudent manner I
could devise at Valparaiso I set out for Santiago where I arrived the
next day and made arrangements with the Customs House Officers for
the Security of the duties, etc.

On the 8th of October, I got my goods despatched from the cus-
toms house stores in Santiago and stowed in my own stores ready for
examination and sale, and from the demand on first opening the
goods I calculated on a speedy and advantageous close of our sales.
But the arrival of the Brig “Viper” from Providence, R. I., owned
by E. Carrington and Company with a quantity of china and other
goods produced a sensible stagnation in the market on the demand
for our goods, of which a considerable quantity were yet on hand,
besides a remnant of the former stock. After having duly considered
the state of affairs in Chili, and finding that a considerable length of
time would be requisite to close the sales of all our goods and collect
payments, etc., I determined to collect all the funds which could be
speedily realized and make another voyage to Canton and back to
Chili while Mr. Robinson should remain to effect the sales of the

320

FROM THE JOURNAL OF THE “PACKET” IN THE NEW YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET’

residue of goods yet on hand, and collect the amount due, with a
view to forward to the owners a remittance from Canton as quickly
as possible.

On the 3rd of January, I departed from Santiago for Valparaiso
to prepare the ship for sea and on the 19th of the same sailed for
Coquimbo in order to collect a few thousand dollars due me at that
place. Arrived at Coquimbo on the 23rd, collected the amount due
then and sailed from thence on the 1st of February bound to Canton
intending to touch at the Sandwich Islands for some firewood and a
few pieces of timber &c for anchor stocks of which we stood much in
need

The former king of these Islands Tamahahmahah died about 10
months since .... sensible of his approaching dissolution to the
last hour of his life and extremely unwilling to leave this world, hav-
ing supported a system of the most unlimited tyranny ever known
over the inhabitants of these Islands for more than twenty years.
With him ceased the worship of images or Idols and that abominable
system of Priestcraft and oppression the Taboo, which was the main
prop and support of his Tyranny.

19 March, Having procured some timber for an anchor stock and
two spare spars at Atooi, we sailed from thence and lay too off Owe-
how a few hours for some vegetables. At 6 130 P. M. of the 20th
we bore up W. B. S. and made all sail for Canton

On the 27th at 10:30 A. M. anchored in Macao Roads and

dispatched a Chinese boat with the first officer for a pilot

On the 2nd of May we anchored at Whampoa having been obliged to
wait 24 hours for a chop for the pilot at Macao. Immediately pro-
ceeded to town where I received a great number of letters, prices,
current lists of sales, etc., from my owners and friends in the United
States, and also letters from my children which were peculiarly grati-
fying. My enquiries were directed without loss of time to the nature
of the goods and the quantities about to be shipped by Messrs. Jenks

and Frost for Chili I was fully of opinion that it would be

my best plan to load principally with Nankins and sugar and take such
ready made silk goods as I might find in the market and depart for
Chili without loss of time .... hoping to arrive there somewhat
sooner than either the “Flying Fish” or “Viper” and if possible effect
a speedy sale of my goods and commence my homeward voyage

321

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET”

On the 27th sent on board the last of my cargo, and on the 30th
closed my letters and accounts and again embarked on board and
immediately gave orders for dropping down the river. On the 1st
of June arrived near Macao Roads having had light adverse winds
in the River and at 4:00 P. M. of the 2nd June cleared away the
Great Ladrone channel and hauled on a wind at S. E. B. E. Saw a
ship standing in under Spanish colors, which appeared like the “War-
ren” of Lima. The Southwestern breeze blew strong with some
squalls, the sea was rough and our ship was rather deeper in the
water than I could have wished and required to be handled with care.
Towards noon carried away the Fore topmast steering sail boom and

split the lower steering sail On the 3rd we had squally

unpleasant weather, the ship making 6 inches of water per hour and
to add to our unpleasant feelings on this subject the pumps were
found on examination to be in a very bad state being both cracked

and decayed in sundry places in the cylinders Of the state

of these pumps I confess I had been ignorant, as we had hitherto no
occasion for them, the ship never having been very deeply laden and
not having made any water worth mentioning, we however soon dis-
covered that the leak was just above the water line near the sternpost
and had escaped the carpenters notice, being under the edge of the

upper rudder brace In smooth water we made no water at

all. My unpleasant apprehensions were much relieved on this dis-
covery as I feared the leak to have been in the bottom and produced
by straining 9

On the 6th (October) arrived and anchored in Valparaiso Bay
at 3 :oo P. M. All well after a voyage of eight months and twenty
days from Valparaiso having been favored by divine Providence with
success and safety and generally with health

Passage from South America to Canton — Received notice from
Mr. Crocker at Valparaiso that my room was broken open and
also the money chest. On examination afterward found I had lost
$1980.34. Early in February 1821, I turned all my attention to the
effecting a close of my business in Chili, but such was the difficulty
experienced in collecting suitable funds for the Canton market that
I did not close the collection of outstanding debts until the month of

9. There follows here a description of an area of calm and fog, and directions how to
avoid it.

322

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET”

June when I returned to Valparaiso & immediately prepared the
“Packet” for sea. On the 4th July 1821, we sailed from Valp0 &
touched at the ports of Coquimbo, Guasco and Copiapo, for the
purpose of receiving some copper and other funds which were due
to me at those places. This business having been satisfactorily closed
we weighed and sailed from Copiapo on Saturday the nth of
August bound to Canton with intention to touch at the Sandwich

Islands There can be little doubt from what I have observed

of late that the best time to make a passage from South America
through the Pacific ocean to the Northwest toward the Sandwich
Islands, Canton or the Philippines, is when the sun is in the south-
ern hemisphere. The prevailing winds and weather being then more
uniform and steady quite over to the Marian Islands.

Nothing material occurred on our passage except a leak which
was discovered in the Larboard bends under the sheathing by which
a considerable quantity of bread was damaged in the bread room.
The bread was taken out and the room dried by fires, and the Bends
examined and caulked after our arrival at the Island of Woahoo.
.... Here we lay until the 10th of October and finished the several

necessary jobs of work on our ship of which we stood in need

On the 14th sailed from Atooi bound to Canton having letters on
board from the Sandwich Island missionaries to the American Board
in Boston. Soon after we got under weigh it fell calm and on the
15th at 4:40 P. M. we cleared away the little Island Tahooree which
bore per compass S. B. E. one mile distant and from this position our
departure was taken for China viz. Canton distant 5160 miles on a
course No. 89° west

Nothing remarkable occurred on our passage .... we arrived
at Macao in 28 days from the Sandwich Islands without injury and all
in tolerable health.

On the 1 6th arrived in Canton where I received letters from Col-
onel Thorndike and friends with New York and Boston catalogues
of sales, schedules of Canton goods, price currents, etc. But although
Colonel Thorndike in his letters made lengthy remarks on prices of
goods, bad markets, etc., yet he gave me no positive directions respect-
ing the kinds or qualities of goods he would have me invest for him-
self or the Gentlemen freighters nor did any of the freighters for-
ward such direction excepting William Sturgis Esqe. And here I

323

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET1

cannot but remark how desirable it would be that owners and freight-
ers when writing to their factors or agents abroad should endeavor
to give them all the matter of fact information which they possess
respecting prices, demand for particular goods, etc. After which
either have them to decide on the spot for the investment of their
funds or else give positive directions to invest specific kinds of goods
naming qualities or prices. This would relieve the factor from much

embarrassment I was rather inclined to ship a proportion of

fair quality Tea, but a small quantity of Merchantable Teas had been
shipped and at present none seemed likely to be

The late difficulties10 between English and American foreigners
in Canton, and the Chinese government made it extremely difficult to
commence any business in Canton with certainty, and it was some time
before I could get my ship secured, and much longer before I could
form a contract with any safe merchant for the manufacture of silk
goods. However I at length succeeded in forming a contract with
Namchong for the greater part of my silks, though at rather high
prices

Landed the funds and proceeded to exhibit the Bullion to the
Chinese money dealers, for sale. It was examined by all the principal
banking companies or money house companies & the city and after
holding out for the highest bidder full four weeks I sold the gold at
$19.40 per tale or $14.55 Per ounce. Silver $16.32 per pound and
copper at $19.30 per pecul of 133 */$ pounds for cash in broken money
at the customary weight on delivery. This was the best which could
be done with it

On the 5th of February (1822) dropped the ship down to second
bar and on the 6th I closed my accounts and went on board and imme-
diately got under weigh and proceeded down the river. Cleared away
the Great Ladrone Islands on the 8th and with brisk Eastern breezes
and fair weather we stood to sea under all close hauled sail at South
by East with a regular sea. Our ship was very crank on account of
the great quantity of water, spare rigging, cables, anchors, etc., on
deck, as we had not room for our lumber below, but by a close atten-
tion to the sails in squally weather I had no doubt of making a safe
passage. Steered south by compass with a N. N. W. current until we

10. Probably the case of a Chinese woman who was allegedly murdered by an Ameri-
can sailor, F. R. Dulles, “Old China Trade,” p. 132.

324

VOYAGE OF THE SHIP “PACKET”

cleared away the Eastermost of the Paracels viz. Lincoln Island,
passed it about n or 12 miles distant by Chron. After which steered
S. S. W

Our passage round the Cape of Good Hope was long and tedious,
the Easterly breezes were light and of short continuance, while those
from the West and W. S. S. to W. N. W. were long and violent, and
frequent intervals at the shifting of the winds, of long calms and
light flows with a disagreeable short head sea

Passed to the westward of St. Helena and had one day of squally
weather and crossed the Equinoctial on the 7th May in longitude 220
53' west of Greenwich .... did not take a regular trade wind

until in latitude 30 30' north The N. E. trades commenced

fresh and steady in 40 North and continued very regular up to lati-
tude 26.30 North when it gradually lessened and veered to the E. S. E.
.... May 31 the eastermost isles of the Bermudas in sight ....
weather variable

June 9. 6 :oo P. M. close in with Scituate Harbor, at 1 1 :oo P. M.
took a pilot and at 2 :oo A. M. arrived in Nantasket Roads. At 10 :oo
A. M. arrived in town per the Hospital Island Boat with Dr. Welch
in whom I recognized an old friend and who attended me to safe and
comfortable Lodgings at the Exchange Coffee House. I was unable
to help myself having had an ill turn just before I landed and did not
come to the possession of my faculties until some time after I arrived
at the Exchange Coffee House. Having taken a little broth I took
my bundle of papers and called at Colonel Thorndike’s house in Sum-
mer Street Thus after an absence of four years and eleven months

and twenty-four days during which I had experienced much solicitude
and various vicissitudes I was again permitted to visit my native coun-
try and home, my life mercifully continued to me through frequent
scenes of extreme peril

325

Alexander FI,

aptam Alexander Ileming am

Joyce, Hi 3 Wife,

Of “Wertfalia " Rappahannock County, Virginia

By Lenora Higginbotham Sweeny, Astoria, New York

“The Flemings dwelt in Flanders where the argent rivers flow.
They crossed the sea with William I a thousand years ago.”

HE Flemings were originally a Germanic tribe. The name
“Fleming” signifies a native of Flanders. In “Domesday
Book” several tenants-in-chief are designated Flanderensis,
or native of Flanders (land of the Flemings).

“The statue of an armed knight, with a fret upon his shield; hands
elevated in a praying posture ; sword by his side, and legs across, may
be seen in Furness Abbey, Lancashire, England, an ancient burial
place of the Fleming family. It was placed there generations ago in
memory of Sir John Le Fleming, a Crusader.”

The surname of this illustrious family, according to the sentiments
of the most approved historians and antiquarians, was at first assumed
from a person of distinction, who, in the days of King David I, a
Fleming by nation, transplanted himself into Scotland, and took the
surname Flanderensis, or Le Fleming, from the country of his origin.

Robert Le Fleming, the direct and immediate ancestor of the earls
of Wigton, was one of the great barons of Scotland, under King
Edward I of England.

It was this Sir Robert who repaired to the standard of Robert
the Bruce, and, with a few trusty friends, all brave men, accompanied
him, whom they thought their lawful sovereign, in adventure at Dum-
fries, where they killed Sir John Cuming, and never rested till they
set the crown upon the head of the immortal monarch, on the Feast
of Annunciation, A. D. 1306. He was succeeded by his son, Sir Mal-
colm Fleming, Lord of Fulwood, also in great favor with the king,
who made him a grant of land in Wigtonshire, and also Governor of
Dumbarton Castle and sheriff of the county.

326

tty A/- ///an tAa tar/. a/
Jtt /t/.-mi/y an./
' £///// /vr/w/J

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

He was succeeded by his son, Sir Malcolm Fleming, who was a
forwarder and assister of the right and title of David II Brucian line.
He also was Governor of Dumbarton Castle, and discharged the
trust with the utmost fidelity. During the whole of the usurpation
of Baliol, this castle was a place to which the royalists did freely, and
with great security, resort. Here Sir Malcolm had the honor to
shelter and protect, in that evil time, Robert, Lord High Steward of
Scotland, afterwards King Robert II. “His Highness was graciously
pleased in reward of Sir Malcolm’s signal loyalty and fidelity in his
service, to create him Earl of Wigton. The good earl fell sick and
died soon after.” He left his estates and title to his grandson,
Thomas Fleming, second Earl of Wigton, who sold the Earldom in
1371/2.1

John, sixth Lord Fleming, born 1567, re-created Earl of Wigton,
by James I at Whitehall, 19th March, 1606, the title “to last and
continue to him and his heirs-male of lawful lineal descent in all time
to come, on account of his distinguished services to the State and his
personal affections to his Sovereign.”* He married Lady Lilias
Graham, only daughter of John, third Earl of Montrose, and died
1619. They had four sons: 1. John, second Earl of Wigton. 2.

James. 3. Malcolm. 4. Alexander. The latter renounced his pro-
vision of 10,000 merks from land of Cumbernauld to his brother, John,
second Earl of Wigton, in May, 1620.

It has been stated that the immigrant ancestor of the Flemings
of Virginia was “Sir Thomas Fleming, second son of the Earl of
Wigton in Scotland,” that he married a Miss Tarleton in England,
and came to Virginia in 1616. But this statement cannot be correct,
as John, second Earl of Wigton (died 1650), who married in 1609,
Lady Margaret Livingstone, second daughter of Alexander, first Earl
of Linlithgow, had no son Thomas, but had three sons : 1 . John, third
Earl of Wigton. 2. Alexander. 3. William.

John, fourth Earl of Wigton and ninth Lord Fleming, died with-
out male issue, and the title passed to his brother, William, fifth Earl
of Wigton, who died 1681. The title became dormant with his son,
Charles, seventh Earl of Wigton, and twelfth Lord Fleming, born
about 1675 and who died unmarried at Cumbernauld, 16 May, 1747.
The title was then assumed by Charles Ross Fleming, M. D., of Dub-

I- Seaver : “Fleming Family Records,” p. 3. Teetor: “The Fleming Family,” pub-
lished in “The Great Divide,” Chicago, Illinois, December, 1893.

♦Fleming: “Flemish Influence in Britain,” Vol. II, p. 268.

327

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

lin, Ireland, who claimed descent through Alexander Fleming, fourth
son of John, first Earl of Wigton. He, however, failed to furnish
proof of his descent. He died in 1769, and in 1777, his son Hamilton
Fleming, asserted his title to the Earldom, but in 1782 his claim was
rejected by the House of Lords.2

The first Fleming of whom any record is found in Virginia, is
Alexander Fleming, who came to Virginia in 1649-50, with other
adherents of Charles I and who on August 6, 1655, purchased land in
Lancaster County, Virginia, from William Moseley, a resident of
that county. The conveyance was witnessed by George Rowles and
recorded “ye iv day of 9ber 1655 Pr me Wm Stanford,” on page 214,
“Lancaster County Deeds, &c., 1652-57.”

As nothing further is known of the history of Alexander Flem-
ing, second son of the Earl of Wigton, it is possible that he is identical
with Alexander Fleming, the Virginian immigrant of 1649-50.

In 1658, Alexander Fleming was granted 250 acres of land on
the north side of Rappahannock River, in Rappahannock County,
Virginia, for transporting five persons into the Colony, and in 1662,
Sir William Berkeley, Knt., granted him 400 acres of land lying
between the south side of Silvester Thatcher’s Creek and the “land
whereon the sd. Fleming now liveth,” for transporting eight persons
into the Colony:

Jno. Wright
Margarett Edderman
Finniell Danah (?)
Jno. Mill
Phillip Pascall
Tho. Stone
Jno. Mason

Wm. Taylour
Eliz. Weekes
Ann Stokes
Roger Reeves
Roger Read
Wm. Jones3

March 18, 1662, he was granted 800 acres of land on the north
side of Rappahannock River, Lancaster County. (“Patent Book 5,”
page 341.)

In March, 1664, “Captain” Alexander Fleming seems to have
been granted his first land on the south side of Rappahannock River,
lying on the “upper side of the Cove of the bay opposite to a poynt
between Nanzemond and Nansatequond towne, adjoining upon the

2. “Scots Peerage,” Vol. VIII, pp. 545-58. Hunter : “Biggar and The House of

Fleming.”

3. Nugent: “Cavaliers and Pioneers,” Vol. I, pp. 384, 419.

328

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

northwest with Cedars Creek, which divides this and land of John
Gillet, &c., granted Clem*. Herbert 21 April 1657, by him deserted
and granted said Fleming upon petition, by order of the Governour
and Council 28 March, 1664.”

Subsequently he was granted the following land : 200 acres on the
south side of Rappahannock River, January 25, 1666, for transport-
ing four persons, by name Jno. Davis, Tho : Horton, Dorothy Hart
and David Parker. (“Patent Book 6,” page 23) ; April 17, 1667,
2,750 acres on the south side of Rappahannock River, for transport-
ing fifty-five people :

Marg** Rawlins

ffran. Jones

Geo : ?

W“ Crofts

Sam11 Harford

Sam1 Woke

Mary Hunt

Nick Spence

Dan11 Will”9

Elias Woodbridge

Dennis Sharpe

Jn° Worlock

Nich. Spenser

Jane Vatter

Math Hamer

Mary Wood

W” Thomson

Daniell Parker

Rob* Levin

Walter Williams

Rich. Palmer

Garheed Sparkes

Sam1 Price

Jn° Hutchinson

Robt. ffleming

Dennis Watkins

Jn° Greene

Mary Spruce

Tho: Wood

James Bruce

Richd. Parker

ffrancis Pye

ffrancis Willis

Martin Woodliffe

Henry Mills

Nicholas Wilks

Benjamin Daniell

Grace Andrews

Lawrence Meeker

Symon Gray

Michaell Wailler

Jn° Horton

Rob* Spurtin

Stephen Michaell

Alice Potter

Jn° Miller

James Robins

Dan11 Diskins

Silves*1 Thatcher

Hen. Vandulott

Dorothy Thatcher

Henry Sanders

An0 Downe

(Illegible)

W“ Hope

(“Patent Book 6,” page 62.)

329

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

September 4, 1667, he patented 560 acres of land “in the ffreshes
of Rappahannock County about two miles from ye river” for trans-
porting twelve persons whose names are given hereunder:

Lawe. ffletcher
James Bird
Jno. Aster
Joane Claydon
Alice Ayers
Eliz. Clayton

(“Patent Book 6,” page 183.)

Marmaduke Harwar
Sam1 Briggs
An Smith

An Lon

Ant. Champion
Henry Hoster

To these patents he added continually by purchase until his hold-
ings on the Rappahannock became extensive, and here he built the
Mansion House, naming it “Westfalia,” in memory of the Father-
land of his ancestors.

He married three widows (one at a time) and to his already large
estate added their widows’ dowers.

In the seventeenth century in Virginia, a lonely widow seldom
remained one long, unless by choice. In many cases, the “loving
friend” named by the deceased husband as executor of his estate, con-
soled his relict by proposing marriage, probably in some instances as
a means of protecting the widow and her children from being scalped
by the Indians, but more often it was the large estate left to her by
her husband that they desired to add to their plantations which caused
Cavaliers of Colonial Virginia to marry widows in preference to the
maidens of that day.

Captain Alexander Fleming married, first, Ursula Browne, widow
of John Browne, “late of Accomacke, Decd.”4 At what date he mar-
ried her is not known, but she certainly was his wife by the nth of
August, 1659. her widowhood she had purchased land of William
Smart, Gent., 29 May, 1656, and on n August, 1659, Alexander
Fleming and wife, Ursula, made an agreement with John Nuthall,
of London, Merchant, attorney for Robert Ingram, executor of the
will of Joseph Ingram, deceased:

This Bill Bindeth me Allex Fleming of the County of Rappa.
my heirs or assignes to pay or cause to be paid unto Mr John Nuthall

4. John Browne’s will, dated August 20, 1654; proved January 20, 1655, in Accomac
County, Virginia: Wife, Ursula; sons, John, Thomas, and Stephen Browne; daughters,
Mary (under twelve years of age), Sarah, and Elizabeth Browne. (“Will Book 5.”)

330

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

of London merchant for the use of Mr Robert Ingram or his heirs
of S*. Ives in Huntington Sheire Baker the full & just Sum of Six
thousand four hundred pounds of good sound Bright merchantable
Virginia Tobacco in Leaf with sufficient Cask to contein the same &
pick* & Culd according to act of Assembly this Tobacco being to be
paid at the now dwelling plantation of Allex Fleming in the Freshes
of Rappahannock upon the tenth day of November next which will
be in the year of our Lord 1660 & for the better Security of payment
of the aforesaid Debt or sum of Tobacco I the said Allexander Flem-
ing with the Consent of my Loving wife Ursula Fleming do bind over
our Land & plantation we now live on withall the houseing thereunto
& upon belonging being a parcell of Land bought of Mr William
Smart by my said wife Ursula Fleming & rendered up into the hands
& possession of Allex Fleming & his heirs by me Ursula Fleming for
Ever we the said Allexander Fleming & Ursula Fleming bind over
the aforesaid Land with the said houseing & appurtenances thereunto
belonging unto Mr John Nuthall for the use of Mr Robert Ingram &
his heirs for the full terme of Ninety nine years more over I Ursula
Fleming purely & freely bind over all my right & title of the Land
aforesaid unto Mr John Nuthall & his heirs or order for the use of
Mr Robert Ingram or his assignes for the full term of Ninety nine
years from me & my heirs that is to say all my part as to Dower or
thirds unto me belonging & to the true performance hereof we here-
unto set our hands & seals jointly & Severally this 11th day of August
i659

Signed sealed & Delivered
in the presence of

John H (— | 1 Huss his mk

John Cooper

Allex Fleming Seale
Signum

Ursula V Fleming Seale

I John Nuthall of Accomack gent. Att°. of Mr Robert Ingram of
S*. Ives in huntingsheir do Constitute ordaine & appoint my Loving
Friend Mr John Hall of Rappahannock merchant my true & Law-
full Attorney to arrest & implead to Judgment Mr Allexander Flem-
ing of the County of Rappahannock late husband of Ursula Fleming
the widdow of Mr. John Browne of Accomack & Exx to her said deed
husband Mr John Browne of the County of Accomack for a debt due
as may appear by Specialty under both their hands to the said Ingram
& upon Composition with the said Fleming I do hereby authorise my
said Attorney to resigne to & possesss the said Fleming his heirs Exrs
& assignes with a parcell of Land being formerly bound over by the

33i

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

said Mr Fleming & Ursula his wife for the said Debt for the terme
of ninety nine years according to the said bill & what my said Attorney
shall act or do in the premisses I do hereby ratify & Confirme to be as
Authentique in Law as if I myself were personally present & did it
myself In witness hereof I have hereunto set my hand & seale this 22d
of February 1660

Witness John Nuthall Seale

Edmond Dobson
Signum S T Silvester Thacher

Recordat the 23th of Aprill 1661 P me

Wa: Granger Cl Cur Rappa.

(“Rappahannock County Deed Book 2,” pp. 174-75.)

In 1664, Thomas Browne, of the County of Accomac, appointed
his “loving friend” Thomas Mapes, his attorney to acknowledge his
release of the above land to his stepfather, Captain Alexander
Fleming :

Know All Men by these Presents that I Thomas Browne of
the County of Accomack in Virga for divers considerations me here-
unto especially moving and in consideration of two Servants to me to
be paid as is expressed by two bills bearing date with these presents
do hereby give and grant all my right title and interest of a pattent of
Six hundred & sixty acres of Land formerly William Yarrits and sold
by the said William Yarrit to Mr. Smart & by him assigned to my lov-
ing Mother Ursula Brown alias ffleming as by y® sd assignm* may
appear Now Know Ye that I Thomas Brown do deliver up all my
right of the sd Land from me & my heirs unto my ffather in Law5
Cap*. Alex ffleming & his heirs & assignes for ever wthall ye. apptences
of & belonging to the sd. Land I say from me & my heirs In witness
to the abovesaid premisses I hereunto set my hand & Seal this 14th
day of ffebruary A°. 1664.

Signed Sealed & Deliver’d Thomas Brown Seal

in the presence of

Robt. Mapes

John Gaines

Will Hogge

(“Rappahannock County Wills, Deeds, &c., No. 1, 1665-77,” PP*

83-84.)

April 19, 1660, Alexander Fleming and wife, Ursula, of Rappa-
hannock County, acknowledge in court their deed of conveyance to

5. A term used in the seventeenth century for stepfather, a usage which has proved
a stumbling block to many writers.

332

BOGHALL CASTLE, ANCIENT HOME OF THE LORDS FLEMING

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

William Wilson, of the same County. (“Rappahannock County,
Deed Book 2,” p. 126.)

Within less than a year after the recording of this deed, bereaved
of his wife, Ursula, Alexander Fleming was seeking another bride,
and found her in the person of Elizabeth Clapham, made a widow
the second time by the death of her husband, William Clapham, Jr.,
of Lancaster County.

William Clapham, Jr., had married Elizabeth, the widow of Epa-
phroditus Lawson, who, in 1633, was living in Nansemond County,
Virginia. His will, dated 31 March, and probated June, 1652, in
Lancaster County, was recorded nearly one hundred years later, in
Essex County, Virginia, “Will Book 6,” page 420. In his will he
makes provision for an unborn child, which proved to be a daughter,
christened Elizabeth, who was an infant in arms when her mother
married William Clapham, Jr.:

“At a Court holden for Lancaster at ye house of Mr James Bag-
nell on ye 6th of October 1652.

Mr Toby Smith Mr Andrew Gilson

Present Mr James Bagnell Mr Richard Loes

Mr David ffox
Mr Geo: Taylor

The Court hath ordered y1 accordinge to instructions under ye
hand of ye Honble, ye Gouvenr y1 ye Sheriff of this Countie doe delivr &
put into ye possession of Wm Clapham Junir who maried ye relict of
Epaphroditus Lawson all such Estate or Estates in Lands Chatties
Chatties (sic) or seruants as are specified in a morgage of sale made
ouer Unto Rich : Benett Esqr from ye said Epapro : Lawson.”

(“Lancaster County Deeds, &c., 1652-57,” pp. 15-16.)

In compliance with the foregoing order of the Court, Richard
Bennett transferred the property to William Clapham, Jr., in the
following words:

“Know all men by these prsents y* I Richard Bennett of Virginia
March1* doe hereby make over & Assigne unto Wm Clapham ye
Younger all ye right tytle & Interest y1 I have & wch to me belongs in
an Estate of Land Seruants Cattle hogs & househould goods and what-
soeuer else y* is Exprest in a writinge of Mortgage Dated ye 13th day
of Aprill as 1651 by Mr Epapro: Lawson Deced for fortie Thousand
pounds of tobacco & Caske as in & by ye sd writinge may & doth
apeare Exceptinge two thousand acres of Land upwards in Rapa-

333

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

hanock river wch is to be disposed thus Viz one thousand acres thereof
to Rich Lawson & his heirs for euer the other thousand Acres to be
entered & recorded for Eliza : ye Daughter of ye aforsd Epaphroditus
to her & her heirs in Case shee Hue to fifteen Yeares of age but if shee
Hue not soe longe then y* it shall belonge to him ye aforesd Wm Clapham
and his heirs

All wch Lands Seruants Cattle goods as mentioned in ye aboue said
writinge shall bee & come toy6 aforesd Wra Clapham his heires ExecutrB
Admistr8 & Assignes for euer in Consideracion of thirtie Six thousand
pounds of tobacco & Caske to be pd as followeth Six thousand thereof
readie downe upon all demands & ye other 30 thousand at 3 paymts ye
3 ensueinge Yeares followinge after this Viz* tenn thousand pounds
Yearly.

In Witness whereof I haue heare Unto set my hand & seale ye 12th
day of 7ber 1652. Ri: Bennett

In prsence of the seale

Richard Lawson

It is further Condicond & Agreed y* if Mr Lawsons Pattent for
1000 acres of land Lyinge Lowermost in Rapahanock river be not
included in ye Mortgage to me y* then ye same may be for ye Child in
Hew of ye 1000 acres weh was reserved for her in his writinge & ye sd
1000 Acres aboue to belonge to ye sd Wm Clapham & his heirs for euer
Witness my hand ye 5th of 8ber 1652

Witness John Scapes Ri : Bennett

Recoginr in Curia 10th January

et Recordat 12° die Janarij 1652 [1653] Teste Jo: Philips.

(“Lancaster County Deeds, &c., No. 1, 1652-57,” page 31.)

On July 15, 1658, William Clapham, Jr., and wife, Elizabeth, of
Lancaster County, Virginia, appointed their friend Alexander Flem-
ing, of Rappahannock County, their attorney to acknowledge in court
a deed of conveyance to Captain William Underwood, of Rappahan-
nock County, to one tract of land lying on the north side of the river,
assigned to William Clapham, Jr., by William Smart. (“Rappahan-
nock County Deed Book No. 2,” page 42.)

William Clapham, Jr., in his will dated January 16, 1659,
bequeaths to his son, William Clapham, 200 acres of land on Fleet’s
Bay, and all other estate to be divided between his wife Elizabeth, son
William, daughter Anne and “my other little infant that my sd. wife
goes with.” He made his wife, Elizabeth Clapham, and his “brother-
in-law,” Thomas Madestard, executrix and executor of his will, which
was proved in Lancaster County, June 16, 1660, and recorded in
“Book of Deeds, &c., 1654-66,” page 75.

334

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

February 5, 1660-61, Alexander Fleming, of Rappahannock
County, made an agreement with John Barrow, to sell 643 acres of
land in Rappahannock County, which formerly had been granted to
Walter Dickenson, 6 September, 1655, adjoining land now in the
tenor of Alexander Fleming, and “he did warrant the same free from
the dower of his wife, Elizabeth Fleming.” (“Rappahannock County
Deed Book 2,” pages 176, 268.)

September 9, 1661, Alexander Fleming was one of the Coroner’s
Jury impaneled to inquire into the deaths of several persons “lately
murthered at the house of Richard White in the Freshes of Rappa-
hannock County.” (“Rappahannock County Deed Book 2,” pages
201-02.)

July 10, 1662, Alexander Fleming, Gent., and Elizabeth, his wife,
of Rappahannock County, deed 200 acres of land in said county to
Mr. Francis Doughty, Clerk, for a consideration of 3,000 pounds
of tobacco. (“Rappahannock County Book of Wills, Deeds, &c.,
No. 1,” page 254.)

There is a power of attorney recorded in Rappahannock County,
dated January 1, 1666, by which Captain Juniper Plover appoints
Captain Alexander Fleming his attorney to acknowledge a deed to
Henry Reeves, heir-at-law of Mr. Robert Sharp.

From the following document it appears that by July 3, 1666,
Captain Alexander Fleming had lost his second wife, Elizabeth :

Whereas I, Wm Harper of the County of Rappa. hath in my
possession and keeping two Cows and two Cow Calves belonging pply
to my Daughter Eliza. Harper being the Increase of one Cow given
to her formerly by her God Mother Mrs. Eliza. Clapham, and the
Late Wife of Mr. Alex. Fleming the marks of the sd Cattle being
mrked as Vizt : Cropt on both Eares wth two slitts in ye Right Eares
and a half moone in the left the two Cows going by the Name of
Patch and Nancey the one a Browne Cow & wt. Flank and the other
a Blacke Cow wch. said Cattle aforesd. I desire may be Recorded for
the ppr Use and Accompt of my Daughter Elizabeth aforesd to wch
End I Wm. Harper by these pnts have Constituted Ordained &
appoynted in my place and steed my trusty and Loveing Friend John
Ryman my true and Lawfull Attorney to Acknowledge & surrendr:
up in Court for my Use the aforemenconed Catle wth. all the Increase
to and for the Use and ppr. Accompt of my Daughter Eliza Radifying
& Confirming Allowing wt. my sd Attorney shall doe or Cause to be
Done in the Execucon of the Premises as if my selfe were personally

335

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

psent in Testimony whereof I have sett my hand and seale this 3d day
of July 1666 ye mke of

Signed Sealed Wm. W Harper Seale

& Deliv’d in pts of Us
Edward Rowzee
Richard Goode

Recognits. in Cur Com Rappa. 4 Die July Anno. Domi. 1666
Recordat X° Die Ejusts Mensis Ano. Supsd.

Test

Exa Robt : Davies Cl Cur Sd

A Copy — Teste:

A. D. Latane, Clerk.

(“Rappahannock County Book of Deeds, &c., No. 3,” page 63.)

Captain Alexander Fleming married, as his third wife, at some
time between July, 1666, and September, 1667, Joyce Hoskins, appar-
ently a daughter of Captain William Jones, and the rich and attractive
widow of Anthony Hoskins, of Accomac County, who came to Vir-
ginia in the “George,” 1635, 6 aged 22 years, and, therefore, born
circa 1613. Anthony Hoskins was granted 700 acres of land in
Northampton County, in 1652, for transporting himself, Alice Hos-
kins, and twelve other persons into the Colony of Virginia.7 In the
same year he was a member of the General Assembly for Northampton
County. In his will, dated 19 July, 1665, and probated 16 August,
1665, he makes his eldest daughter Elizabeth (under age of 16), his
sole heir: daughter, Ann; wife, Joyce, executrix, and wished her to
have the use of his plantation for life; .... ; Father, Captain Wil-
liam Jones, and friend, Lt. Col. William Waters, Supervisors of his
will. That the testator was not without anxiety about leaving his
wife and daughters alone in this savage country, is shown by the fol-
lowing pathetic plea to the Supervisors of his Will : “I desire them

for God sake to assist my wife & Children.”8

As a matter of fact, they were soon relieved of the responsibility
for the two daughters, Elizabeth and Anne Hoskins, went to live with
their mother, Joyce, at “Westfalia,” Rappahannock County, Virginia.
Here they found ample protection. Captain Alexander Fleming was
prominently identified with the affairs of the country; a Justice of the

6. Hotten, p. 124, who gives his name as “Ant0 Hodgskins.”

7. Nugent: “Cavaliers and Pioneers,” Vol. I, p. 264.

8. Nottingham: “Wills & Administrations, Accomac Co., Va., 1663-1800,” Vol. I,

p. 1, who gives his name as “Anthony Hodgkins.”

336

PAGE FROM LANCASTER COUNTY DEEDS, ETC., No. 1, 1652-57, IN VIRGINIA
STATE LIBRARY

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

Peace, Captain of the Militia and a member of the Vestry for Sitting-
bourne Parish.

A deed of gift made by Robert Payne, Sr., in 1668, to Captain
Alexander Fleming’s daughters, Alexia and Elizabeth Fleming, shows
by that date they had a daughter christened — Elizabeth Fleming.

Know All Men by these pnts that I Robt. Payne of the County
of Rappa. in Virginia out of the verry true Love and Harty affec-
tion wch. I Bare unto Alexia Fleming Daughter of Capt. Alex: &
Elizabeth Fleming of the same County doe for me my heires Exec-
tors. & admrs. freely give Deliver assigne Over firmely Clearely &
absolutely into the Hands of Capt. Alex: Fleming for the use of
Alexia Fleming as her pper Estate One Wall Eyed mare Filly wth.
all her future increase called By the Naime of Pyball (Vizt.) to her
the said Alexia Fleming her heires and ass’s or Order for Evmore shee
the said Alexia allowing and granting to her Father Capt. Alex:
Fleming all the male increase that shall come of the sd. mare filly
PyBall till Alexia shall attaine to the Aige of twelve yeares and that
then as aforesaid shee shall enjoy all Both male and Femaile to her
and her heirs for Evemore But in case it should so please Almighty
God that the said Alexia should Depart this life Before shee Come
to Be twelve yeares of aige or Before Marriage that then I give the
sd. mare wth. increase unto Elizabeth the now Daughter of Alex:
and Joyce Fleming to her and her Heires &c as amply and Freely as
if Alexia had lived or may Be Collected out of the abovesd. grant to
Alexia her heires &c. from me Robt. Payne my heires and assignes &c
for Evmore But in case that the said Elizabeth Fleming should alsoe
Depart this Life Before shee attaine to the aige of twelve yeares or
marriage then I Order the aforesd. mare & increase to be at full
power and Disposing By Sale guift or otherwise of the Chiefe Parent
then Liveing as they then shall thinke meete alwayes pvided their Be
noe heire apparent to Alexia nor Elizabeth Fleming and for the
more Fuller confirmacon of this Deed and Guift I hereunto Sub-
scribe my hand and Seale this first Day of September ano. 1668.

Signed Sealed and Ro. Payne Seale

Deliv’d in ptns of Us
Robert Mapes
Signe

John B Barrow

Recognitt. in Cur Com Rappa. 30 Die 7bris 1668
Recordatr X°. Die Ejus Mensis Ano. Suped.

Test Ro Payne Cl Cur

A Copy — Teste :

A. D. Latane, Clerk.

(“Rappahannock County Book of Deeds, &c., No. 3,” pp. 504-0*;.)

337

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

The same day, Captain Alexander Fleming, Gent., of Rappahan-
nock County, “out of the Love and Singular true affection wch. I Bare
unto my Godson Rob1. Payne Junior, sone of Rob*. Payne Sennr. of
the same County Doe for me my heires Executors & Admrs. freely
Absolutely give grant and Assigne over and Deliver into the Hands
of Rob*. Payne Junior as his owne Pp. Estate one mare Filly called
Rose, &c.” (“Rappahannock County Book of Deeds, &c., No. 3,”

pp. 503-04-)

The above Robert Payne, Sr., under the assumed name of Rob-
ert Davis, married, prior to September 11, 1666, Elizabeth Lawson,
born 1652, the daughter of Epaphroditus Lawson and wife, Elizabeth.

On September 20, 1666, Robert Payne, Sr., came into Court and
after declaring that he had lived under the name of Robert Davis for
the past five years, during which period he had married a wife, trans-
acted business and had also acted as a public officer in the Court of
Rappahannock County, that now “desiring to undeceive the world,”
asked to be allowed to resume his true surname of Payne. The Court
being satisfied with the reasons he gave for assuming the name of
Davis, granted his request, and ordered “that the right and true sir-
name of the sd person hitherto called Davis and of his wife and isue
(when he shall have any) is and shall be from henceforth called,
accepted and taken to be Payne.”9

The following year, as we learn from a document of record dated
May 15, 1667, Captain Alexander Fleming conveys to Robert Payne,
Sr., Clerk of the Court of Rappahannock County, one-half part of
2,750 acres of land “in the Freshes of Rappa. River & on the Backe
of Portobacco Indian Lyne.” (“Rappahannock County Deeds, &c.,
No. 3,” pp. 399-400.)

The will of Robert Payne, Sr., Gent., of Rappahannock County,
dated March 21, 1671, and recorded on page 187 of “Will Book No.
1,” November 4, 1675, stipulates that if his wife, Elizabeth Payne,
should die without heirs other than their son, Robert Payne, Jr., and
should he die without lawful issue, “my will is that William Clap-
ham Alexia Fleming and Mary Clapham enjoy all and singular my
lands equally to be divided between them and their heirs forever.”

9. “William & Mary College Quarterly,” Second Series, Vol. XIII, No. 4, p. 249.

338

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

To attempt to correct the statement made by so accomplished a
genealogist as Mr. C. A. Hoppin, that Robert Payne, Sr., married
Elizabeth Fleming, daughter of Alexander Fleming, might render the
writer liable to the criticism that — “Fools rush in where angels fear
to tread.” But it is not possible that Robert Payne, Sr., could have
married Elizabeth, the daughter of Captain Alexander Fleming and
wife, Joyce, as at that date (1666) she had not been born. But he
did marry the stepdaughter of Captain Alexander Fleming — Eliza-
beth Lawson — as is shown by a deed dated 2 February, 1667, and
recorded on pages 407-12, “Deed Book No. 3,” Rappahannock County,
Virginia, which states that the wife of Robert Payne was a daughter
of Epaphroditus Lawson.10

The following power of attorney reveals the fact that Captain
Alexander Fleming was alive in the latter part of the year 1668:

November 3, 1668, Elizabeth Chetwood, wife of Thomas Chet-
wood, of Lancaster County, Virginia, appoints her friend Captain
Alexander Fleming of Rappahannock County her attorney to sell 800
acres of land assigned to her husband by William Ball, Gent., of Lan-
caster County, being formerly patented between said Chetwood and
William Ball. (“Rappahannock County Deeds, &c., No. 3,” p. 526.)

In those days of constancy and fidelity, Joyce remained the wife
of Captain Alexander Fleming until his death, which occurred at
some time between the third day of November, 1668, and the thir-
teenth day of March, 1668/9;11 therefore it does not seem probable

10. Mr. Hoppin also states in “The Washington Ancestry,” Vol. I, p. 136, that the
will of “Robert Payne, Gentleman, Senior, of Rappahannock (now Essex) County, Vir-
ginia, dated March 21, 1671, proved November 4, 1675, reveals that his sister Mary
and his relative Joyce were then married, for he provides that if his wife Elizabeth
(daughter of Alexander Fleming) dies, and their son Robert, Junior, dies without lawful
issue, ‘my will is that William Clapham, Alexia ffleming & Mary Clapham enjoy all and
singular my lands,’ etc.” There is nothing in the will that “reveals” that Joyce was a
relative. Of all those whose writings I have consulted, none seems to have known that
Joyce Fleming was the widow of Anthony Hoskins, of Accomac County, when she mar-
ried Captain Alexander Fleming. Nor was Mary Clapham the sister of Robert Payne, Sr.
She was his wife’s half-sister ; a deed of gift made October 4, 1667, by Robert Payne,
Gent. Sr., of Rappahannock County, “for love and affection I Bare unto Mary ye daugh-
ter of Mr. William Clapham, Junr., Dec4.,” proves that the unborn “little infant” men-
tioned in the will of William Clapham, Jr., was christened — Mary Clapham. (“Rap-
pahannock County Deeds, &c., No. 3,” p. 274.)

Colonel Brooke Payne, in “The Payne Family of Virginia,” says that William Clap-
ham, born 1653, son of William Clapham, Jr., and wife Elizabeth, married Mary, daughter
of Silvester Thatcher. This statement sounds plausible, but I have not verified it; Sil-
vester Thatcher lived neighbor to Captain Alexander Fleming, stepfather of William
Clapham.

11. The approximate date of the death of Captain Alexander Fleming is given in a
quaintly worded deed of gift from the Rev. Francis Doughty, to his wife, Ann. (“Vir-
ginia Magazine of History,” Vol. V, pp. 289-90.)

339

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

that she could have been married to Captain Lawrence Washington in
1667/8, as stated by the Reverend Horace Hayden, in his “Virginia
Genealogies,” page 518.)

From a deed of record in Rappahannock County, Virginia, we
learn that Captain Alexander Fleming died testate. The writer has
been unable to locate his will. He left “Westfalia” to his wife, Joyce
Fleming, to dispose of as she pleased. The following deed reveals
that Joyce with this large estate did not long remain a widow. She
married, as her third husband, Captain Lawrence Washington, who
emigrated from England to Virginia with his brother, John Wash-
ington, circa 1657. 12 Later, he returned to England, where he mar-
ried, January 26, 1660, Mary, daughter of Edward Jones, of Luton,
Gent. After her death, leaving his daughter, Mary, to the care of her
grandparents, Lawrence Washington returned to Virginia,13 before
March 23, 1664/5, being claimed as a head-right at this time, by
Colonel Gerrard Fowke and Richard Haiberd:14

February 6, 1671/2.

I Lawrence Washington of the County of Rappahannock, Gent.,
have with the consent of Joyce my wife and for the consideration of
two thousand four hundred pounds of good sound merchantable
Tobacco and Cask paid by Samuel Morris of the same county con-
veys to him all our Right title and Interest of Two hundred acres of
land formerly Captain Alexander Fleming’s and by him sold and
assigned to John Thomizine and from him assigned to me the said
Lawrence Washington as the records of this County may make appear
wch is one-half of four hundred Acres of Land assigned as aforesaid
.... unto Samuel Morris .... the said two hundred acres being
part of a greater tract of Two thousand seven hundred and Fifty
acres lying in the ffreshes of Rappa. on the South Side, the said land
being called Westfalia Lawrence Washington seal

Witness : Signum

Cornelius Wood Joyce =§= Washington seal

William Clapham

Know all men that I Joyce Washington of Rappa County do make
ordaine Constitute and appoint my loving friend Robert Payne of

1 2. Sparks : “Life of Washington,’’ p. 505.

13. Hayden : “Virginia Genealogies,” p. 518. Waters : “Genealogical Gleanings in

England,” p. 409.

14. Nugent : “Cavaliers and Pioneers,” p. 446.

340

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

the same county my True and Lawful Atty. for me and in my name to
acknowledge a Certain Parcell of Land as by deed may more at Large
appear unto Samuel Morris of the same Place to him and his heirs
and assigns for ever. In Witness whereof I have hereunto set my
hand this 6th of May 1673.

Witness : Signum

Cornelius Wood Joyce + Washington

Enoch Doughty

(“Rappahannock County Deed Book 5, 1672-75,” pp. 142-44.)

Elizabeth Hoskins, daughter of Anthony and Joyce (Jones?)
Hoskins, and stepdaughter of Captain Lawrence Washington, mar-
ried Cornelius Wood,15 not later than October 7, 1673, for at that
date, as his wife, she joined with him in a deed of conveyance to
Lewis Loyd, to which Lawrence Washington was a witness. On
March 4, 1673, she gave a power of attorney to “my loving father-
in-law [stepfather] Lawrence Washington,” to acknowledge her
release of dower in the land sold by her husband, Cornelius Wood.
This land was part of 560 acres that Elizabeth Hoskins had patented
in Rappahannock County and deserted and was granted to Lt.-Col.
John Washington, of Westmoreland County, who sold same to Cor-
nelius Wood, as the following transcripts of the records disclose:

“Be it known unto all men by These presents that I John Wash-
ington of Washington parish in Westmoreland county Gent, do make
ordaine Constitute and appoint my loving friend George Jones16 of
Sittingbourne parish Rappa. County my True and Lawful Attorney
for to acknowledge a parcell of land containing five hundred and
Sixty acres lying and being in the Freshes of Rappa County wch I lately
petitioned for to the Right Honble Sr William Berkeley, Kn*. and Gov-
ernour of Virginia and was by him granted unto Elizabeth Hoskins
daughter of Anthony Hoskins late of Accomacke deceased to her and
her heirs forever as witness my hand this 27th of Decmb 1671 —

Witnesses :

John Watts John Washington seal

his mark

James X Fuellin”

(“Rappahannock County Deed Book, No. 5,” p. 15.)

15. Mr. C. A. Hoppin erroneously states in “The Washington Ancestry,” Vol. I, p. 162,
that “Cornelius Wood was the husband of Elizabeth (Fleming) Wood, daughter of

Alexander Fleming, then deceased, whose widow Joyce ( ) Fleming was then the

wife of Lawrence, the brother of John Washington.”

16. George Jones married Honoria, widow of Major John Weir. (“Rappahannock
County Deed Book No. 5,” p. 100.)

341

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

“To all to whom &c. now know ye &c. That I Sr Wra Berkeley Kn*.
&c. do with the consent & advice of the Council &c. give & grant unto
L* Coll0 John Washington five hundred and sixty acres of Land in the
Freshes of Rappa. about two miles from the River side beginning at
a white oake neare a branch side of a Creeke Called Coghill thence
running into the woods for length by a line of Trees that parts this
land and the Lands of Bath0 Gilson .... neare Land of Mr Rob-
ert Payne thence .... the said Land being due to said Washington
as followeth Viz*, being formerly granted to Capt. Alexander Flem-
ing by patent dated the fourth of September 1667 and by the said
Fleming sold to Elizabeth Hoskins and by hir deserted & is now
granted by order of the Gen1 Court dated the 2d of October 1671 and
is further due by Transporting of Eleven persons into this Col-
lony . . . whose names are on the Records mentioned under-
neath this Pattent To have and to hold the said Land wth his due
Share of all mines & minerals therein Contained wth all — Rights and
priveledges of hawking hunting fishing & fouling wth all woods waters
Rivers wth all profitts Commodities & hereditaments whatsoever to
the said Land belonging to him the said Washington his heirs and
assigns forever in as Large & ample manner to all intents & purposes
as is Exprest in a Charter of orders from the Late Treasurer & Com-
pany dated 15th of 9ber 1618 or by Consequence may be justly Col-
lected out of the same or out of the Letters Pattented whereon they
are granted to be . . . . held of our Sovereign Lord the King his
heirs & Successors as of his Manour of East Greenwch in free and
Common Socage and not in Capite or by Knites Service yealding to
our Sovereign Lord the King his heirs & Successors for every fifty
acres of Land hereby granted yearly at the feast of S*. Michael Arch-
angle the fee rent of one shilling which payment is to be made yearly
From yeare to yeare according to his Majesties Instructions of the
12th of September 1662 provided that if the sd L* Coll0 Washing-
ton doe not Seate or plant or Cause to be seated or planted on the
said Land within three years next Ensuing then it Shall be Lawfull
for any adventurer or planter to make Choice & plant on the same
given under my hand & seale of the Collony the 3rd of Novr 1673

Test Cl WM. Berkeley seal

Phill Ludwell”

“Know all men by these presents that I L* Coll0 John Washington
of Westmoreland County for a Valuable Consideration Received of
Cornelius Wood of Rapp3. County doe assigne all my Rightes title
and Interest of this Pattent and the land therein Contained unto the
sd Cornelius Wood his heirs and assignes forever and doe warrant
the said Land from me my heirs Executor8. Administrs. & Assigns for-
ever from any Claime or Claimes by from or under me my heirs

342

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

Execur8. Adminr8. or Assignes In witness whereof I have hereunto set
my hand & Seale this 4th of March An0 Dorn1 1673.

Witness: John Washington seal

Daniel Gaines
John Rosier”

(“Rappahannock County Deed Book, No. 5,” pp. 262, 264, 266.)

Apparently Cornelius Wood had died before the first of the year
1 677/78, as on January 1, 1677/78, Elizabeth Wood, of Rappahan-
nock County, made a deed of gift :

“To my beloved daughter, Cordelia Wood for love and affection
I give all my interest in my estate on the South Side of Rappahannock
River — 380 acres — and a grey mare branded E by the name of Lamb
and two heifers to her, her heirs, &c.

Elizabeth E W Wood Her Mark.”

(Rappahannock County Loose Papers, Box 10 1 — A — .)

Captain Lawrence Washington, husband of Joyce (Jones ?-Hos-
kins-Fleming) Washington, died in 1677. His will, of record in
Rappahannock County, reads as follows:

“In the Name of God Amen I Lawrence Washington of the
County of Rappac. being sick & weak in body but of sound and perfect
memory do make and ordaine this my last will & testament hereby
revoaking annulling & making void all former Wills and Codicills
heretofore by me made either by word or writing & this only to be
taken for my last will & testament Imprs.I give and bequeath my soul
into the hands of Almighty God hoping and trusting through the
mercy of Jesus Christ my one Savior. and redeemer to receive full
pardon & forgiveness of all my sinnes and my body to the earth to be
buried in a comely & decent manner by my Executrix hereafter named
& for my wordly (sic) goods I thus dispose them Item I give and
bequeath unto my loving daughter Mary Washington my whole estate
in England both reall & personall to her & the heirs of her body law-
fully begotten for ever to be delivered into her possession immediately
after my decease by my Executrix hereafter named. I give and
bequeath unto my aforesd daughter Mary Washington my smallest
stone ring and one Silver cup now in my possession to her and her
heirs for ever to be delivered to her immediately after my decease.
I give and bequeath unto my loving son John Washington all my
bookes to him and his heirs for ever to be delivered to him when he
shall come to the age of Twenty one yeares. I give and bequeath
unto my Son John and Daughter Ann Washington all the rest of my

343

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

plate but what is before exprest to be equally divided between them
and delivered into their possession when they come of age. Item my
will is that all my debts which of right and Justice I owe to any man
be Justly and truely paid as also my funerall expences after which
my will is that all my whole estate both reall and personall be equally
divided between my loving wife Jone [Joyce] Washington and the
two children god hath given me by her Viz1 John and Ann Washing-
ton. I give and bequeath it all to them and the heirs of their bodies
lawfully begotten for ever, my sonnes part to be delivered to him
when he comes of age, and my daughters part when she Comes of
age or day of mariage which shall first happen. Item my will is that
land which became due to me in right of my wife lying on the south
side of the river formerly belonging to Cap1 Alexander ffleming and
comonly known by the name of West ffalco [Westfalia] be sold by
my Executrix hereafter named for the payment of my debts imme-
diately after my decease. Item my will is that the land I have for-
merly entred with Cap1 Wm Mosely be forthwith after my decease
surveyed and pattented by my Exec* hereafter named and if it shall
amount to the quantity of one thousand acres then I give and bequeath
unto Alexander Barrow two hundred acres of the sd land to him and
his heirs for ever the remainder I give and bequeath unto my loving
wife aforesd and two Children to them and their heires for ever to be
equally divided between them. Item my will is that if it shall please
God to take my daughter Mary out of this world before she comes
of age or have heirs of hir body lawfully begotten then I give and
bequeath my land in England which by my will I have given to her
unto my son John Washington and his heires and the psonall estate
which I have given to hir I give and bequeath the same unto my
daughter Ann Washington and her heires for ever. Item I do
hereby make and ordain my loving wife Jone [Joyce] Washington
Executrix of this my last will and testament to see it performed and
I do hereby make and appoint my dear and loving brother Coll0 John
Washington and my loving friend Thomas Hawkins (in case of the
death or neglect of my Executrix) to be the overseers and guardians
of my Children untill they come of age to the truth whereof I have
hereunto Sett my hand and Seale this 27th of September 1675.

Lawrence Washington seale

Signed Sealed and declared
to be his last will & testam1. in
the prsence of us

Cornelius Wood
sign

John B Barrow
Henry Tandy junr

A Codicill of the last will &
testament of Lawrence Washing-
ton annext to his will and made
Septemb1 27th 1675 Item my will
is that my part of the land I now

344

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

live upon which became due to me by marriage of my wife, I leave it
wholy & solely to her disposal after my decease as Witness my
hand the day and year above written

Lawrence Washington seale

Signed, Sealed & declared
to be a Codicill of my last will & testam*
in the prsence of us
Cornelius Wood

Henry Tandy junr

The above named Henry Tandy junr aged 17 yeares or there-
abouts sworn & examined saith that he did see the abovenamed Law-
rence Washington Sign, Seale, & publish the above mentioned to be
his last will & testament and that he was in perfect sence and memory
at the Signing Sealing & publishing thereof to the best of your depo-
nents Judgment Henry Tandy

Juratis est Henricus Tandy in Cur Com Rappac Sexto die Junij
An0 1677 p Sacrum prd probat et recordatr.

Test Edm° Craske Cl. Cur.

(“Rappahannock County Book of Wills, Deeds, &c., No. 1,” p.
219.)

On March 25, 1677, Joyce Washington appeared in Rappahan-
nock Court and placed on record the mark of her son John Washing-
ton’s cattle, which was a swallow fork on the right ear and a poplar
leaf on the left ear. Recorded 18 July, 1677. (“Rappahannock
County Book of Deeds, &c., No. 6,” p. 7.)

At some time between March 25, 1677, and April 7, 1677, Joyce
Washington married, as her fourth husband, James Yates, whom she
apparently predeceased, as his will, dated January 9, 1685, and
proved March 3, 1685, makes no mention of a wife:

“Know all men by these prsents that I James Yates of the County
of Rappac planter doe acknowledge my Selfe Justly to be indebted unto
John Washington Junr of the Same County his heires or assignes in
the Just Sume of one hundred pounds Sterling money of England, to
be paid unto the said Washington his heires or assignes upon all
demands. In Witness whereof I have hereunto Sett my hand & Seale
this 7th day of Aprill 1677.

The Condition of this obligation is such that if the above sd James
Yates shall relinquish att his decease the right that he hath of one
third part of the lands formerly belonging to Capt. Alexander ffleming
decd. & after to Majr Lawrence Washington decd. & by them both given
to Joyce Washington their wife to be by her disposed as she thinks

345

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

fitt, the right he hath being now by marrying of her, & in case the
above sd James Yates shall relinquish his rights to his wife to be dis-
posed of by her as she shall think fitt that then this pr8nt obligation to
be Void or otherwise to Stand in full power force & Virtue. In testi-
mony whereof I have hereunto sett my hand & Seal the day & yeare
above written.

Sealed and delivered in the James Yates seal

pr8ence of us

Christopher Blackbourne
Robert Pley
William Dacres

Recordatr i8° die July An0 1677

Test Edm° Craske, Cl. Cur.

(“Rappahannock County Book of Deeds, &c., No. 6,” p. 7.)

In 1680, Anne Hoskins made a deed of gift to her half brother,
John Washington:

“To all xpian people to whom these prsents shall or may come
Anne Hoskins of the County of Rappac Spinster Sendeth greeting in
our Lord God Everlasting Know Yee that I ye sd Anne for diverse
good Causes and Consideracons me hereunto Especially Moveing
& for and in Consideracons of the naturall Love and affection I beare
unto my Broth1 John Washington of the s(d County of Rappac.
have given granted & for ever Confirmed unto the sd John Washing-
ton one mare Colt lately fallen of the gray Mare belonging and of
Right appertaining unto me the sd Anne branded with A :H : to have
& to hold the sd Mare Colte wth all her Increase to ye sd John Wash-
ington & his heires for ever Provided alwaies Notwithstanding this
deed of gifte as aforesd that if it shall happen the sd John Washing-
ton to die within age & without Issue of his body Lawfully begotten
or of full age & wthout Issue as aforesd that then the sd Mare Colt
with all her Increase found at such his death shall Revert & Come
back to ye sd Anne her heires Extrs. adminrs. they or any of them to
be possessed in the same Estate as she the sd Anne was before enseal-
ing & delivery of these prsents In witness where of ye sd Anne Hoskins
hath hereunto sett her hand& Seale this 28th day of May 1680

Anne A H Hoskins Seale
Test her mrke

WM Gannock

Arthr Spicer Recordaf 3 die Junij an0 1680

Test Edm° Craske Cl. Cur.

(“Rappahannock County Book of Deeds, &c., No. 6,” p. ill.)

346

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

According to Dr. W. G. Stanard, John Washington, son of
Major Lawrence Washington and Joyce Washington, was born April
2, 1671. He married, March 15, 1692, Mary, daughter of Robert
Townshend, of Stafford County, and granddaughter of Richard
Townshend, Esqr., of York County, Member of the Council.17

Worthington C. Ford, in “Wills of George Washington, &c.,”
pages 25-26, says: “Among the Washington Papers I found a copy

of a letter written by the son of Lawrence Washington, to his half-
sister Mary, then residing in England. I give it in full :

Virginia, June ye 22d 1699

Dear & Loving Sister

I had the happiness to see a Letter which you sent to my Aunt
Howard who died about a year and a half ago; I had heard of you
by her before, but could not tell whether you were alive or not. It
was truly great joy to hear that I had such a relation alive as your-
self; not having any such a one by my Father’s side as yourself. My
Father had one Daughter by my Mother, who died when she was very
young, before my remembrance. My Mother had three Daughters
when my Father married her, one died last winter, and left four or
five children, the other two are alive & married and have had several
children. My Mother married another man after my Father, who
spent all, so that I had not the value of twenty shillings of my Father’s
Estate, I being the youngest & therefore the weakest, which generally
comes off short. But I thank God my Fortune has been pretty good
since, as I have got a kind and loving wife by whom I have had three
sons and a daughter, of which I have buried a daughter and one son.
I am afraid I shall never have the happiness of seeing you, since it has
pleased God to set us at such a distance, but hoping to hear from you
by all opportunities, which you shall assuredly do from him that is,
Your ever loving Brother

till death

Jn° Washington

If you write to me direct yours to me in Stafford county, on Poto-
mack River in Virginia. Vale.

To Mrs. Mary Gibson, living in Hawnes, in Bedf’s. These sent
with Care.”

As regards the other children whose laughter and merriment rang
through the halls of “Westfalia” in those dark and tragic days in
Virginia : —

Ann Washington died in infancy.

1 7- “Virginia Magazine of History,” XXIII, 97.

347

CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FLEMING AND JOYCE, HIS WIFE

Anne Hoskins may have been preparing for her wedding day when
she made the deed of gift to her half-brother, John Washington.

Elizabeth, daughter of Captain Alexander Fleming and wife,
Joyce, married Rowland Thornton, son of William Thornton, of
Gloucester County. In May, 1701, the bond of Elizabeth Thornton,
as administratrix of Rowland Thornton, of Richmond County,
deceased, was recorded. They had a son, Francis Thornton, who died
in King George County, in 172 6, leaving a widow, Ann Thornton.
(“William & Mary College Quarterly,” First Series, IV, 90.)

Alexia, daughter of Captain Alexander and Elizabeth Fleming,
married, not later than June 4, 1683, Thomas Pace, of Rappahan-
nock County, for on that date she united with her husband in a deed
to a plantation on the north side of Rappahannock River, then in the
right of Thomas Pace and Alexia as part of Alexia’s share of the
estate of her deceased father, Captain Alexander Fleming, land given
in his last will and testament to his daughter, Alexia, as also an equal
part of 2,750 acres of land lying in the freshes of Rappahannock on
the south side of the river, patented 17 April, 1667. (“Rappahan-
nock County Deeds, &c., No. 7,” p. 37.)

From the records of Richmond County is gleaned that Alexia Pace
had died and on September 6, 1692, “Thomas Pace and Jane, his
wife, and Rowland Thornton and Elizabeth, his wife, one of the
daughters of Alexander Fleming — Alexia, late wife of Thomas Pace,
being the other” — joined in a deed to Francis Thornton. (“William
& Mary College Quarterly,” First Series, XVII, 79.)

Alexander Fleming, who married Sarah, daughter of William
Kenny, and was living in Richmond County, Virginia, January 3,
1692, may have been a son of Captain Alexander Fleming by his wife,
Ursula, and perhaps there is a descendant and “heir-male of lineal
descent,” who could claim title to the Earldom of Wigton.

348

BOSTON AND ENVIRONS

THE HOUSE OF PAUL REVERE, BOSTON

loneers

of tke R ock-Bound Coast

By Gleason L. Archer, LL. D., Boston, Massachusetts
President, Suffolk University

(Part V)

CHAPTER XVIII
An Important Meeting in Salem

OW that the last of the transport ships had sailed Gov-
ernor Endicott was free to devote his entire attention to
the great task of providing suitable houses for the home-
less among the newcomers. The abundance of standing
timber in the near vicinity of the settlement simplified the task to a
certain extent, yet the process of transforming growing trees into
beams and planks was time-consuming and difficult. Then, too, the
need of seasoning the wood, lest the dampness of green lumber cause
ill health to occupants of newly built houses, was additional reason
for haste in manufacturing of building materials, that the houses
might become dry and habitable before cold weather should come.
The driving energy of the Governor, therefore, found vent in ways
wholly beneficial to the Colony.

Difficulties of administration were continually manifesting them-
selves in Salem. The Council members brought many such to the
meetings of the board, but the Governor himself was in daily contact
with the human problems involved in the extraordinary system of
oversight of family life. Every lapse of individuals from obedience
to the stern discipline of the Colony called for appropriate action.
Endicott was living up to the admonitions contained in his letters of
instruction and was ever ready to make an example of every such
delinquent, in order that others in the community might be constrained
by fear from following evil courses.

Religion bulked large in the daily life of every soul in the planta-
tion. Books were exceedingly few in those days. There were prac-
tically no intellectual diversions in the Colony, save those afforded
by sermons and religious discourses. Since the colonists had been

349

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

selected from the most zealous of the Puritans of England, it was
natural that the church life of Salem should have assumed propor-
tions quite incomprehensible to later generations. What newspapers,
magazines, books, theatres, motoring and the endless diversions of
the present day are to us, the Salem church services and the Holy
Bible were to the colonists of 1629.

The election of a pastor and teacher had recently stirred the
community. It had been at once a solemn religious pageant and an
event of great importance in the secular life of the community.
Church and State had thus become a reality in Salem. The church
had indeed come into existence at that time, but it was not yet com-
plete. The election of deacons and of a ruling elder had been set
for August 6, 1629, at which time the entire male membership of the
parish was to assemble for the adoption of a church constitution of
their new Puritan church.

In anticipation of this great event an invitation was formally
extended to the church at Plymouth to send delegates to attend the
consecration service, thus to demonstrate the solidarity of the Chris-
tian Church in New England. This invitation met with hearty
response on the part of the older Colony. In order that Plymouth
Plantation might honor the occasion with the most noteworthy of
its membership Governor William Bradford himself was one of those
chosen to attend the Salem meeting. Assurances of Plymouth coop-
eration were returned by the Puritan messenger. Governor Endicott
was, therefore, able to prepare in advance for the first official visit
from the Governor of Plymouth Colony. To every soul in the north-
ern settlement the expected coming of the now famous Governor
Bradford was an event of major importance. Perchance he might
bring the renowned Captain Standish as a member of his party!

The meeting had officially been called to elect a ruling elder and
two deacons. The office of the deacon of a Protestant church is rea-
sonably well known, since he is a lay assistant to the pastor in admin-
istering communion to the congregation as well as in regulating the
affairs of the church. But the ruling elder was an even more impor-
tant official of the early New England churches. In “A Platform of
Church Discipline, Gathered out of the word of God,” published in
Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1649, we find the following:

The ruling elder’s office is distinct from the office of pastor and
teacher: The ruling elders are not so called to exclude the pastors

350

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

and teachers from ruling, because ruling and governing is common to
these, with the other; whereas attending to teach and preach the
word is peculiar unto the former. The ruling elder’s work is to join
with the pastor and teacher in those acts of spiritual rule which are
distinct from the ministry of the word and sacraments committed to
them, of which sort, these be as followeth: To open and shut the

doors of God’s house, by admission of members approved by the
church, .... to prepare matters in private, that in public they may
be carried to an end, and with less trouble and more speedy dispatch;
to be guides and leaders to the Church in all matters whatsoever per-
taining to Church administrations and actions; to see that none in the
Church live inordinately out of rank and place, without a calling, or
idly in their calling; to prevent and heal such offenses in life or in
doctrine as might corrupt the Church ; and, as they shall be sent for,
to visit and to pray over their sick brethren.

Thus it will be seen that the ruling elder was an official of great
secular power. To elect a ruling elder in Salem was, therefore, sec-
ond in importance only to the choosing of the pastor and teacher.
August 6, 1629, had been appointed as a day of fasting and prayer
in order that the people might be in a state of mind appropriate to the
task in hand.

Governor Bradford and his fellow delegates set out from Plym-
outh on August fifth in full confidence that they would reach Salem
in the early morning of the following day. But their shallop soon
encountered contrary winds that rendered their progress up the coast
difficult and dangerous. In navigating so small a craft it was, of
course, needful to keep reasonably close to land, skirting the head-
lands and bays, and thus travelling many an extra mile as well as mak-
ing numerous difficult turns in cross winds and tides.

When the hour arrived for the assembly to convene Governor
John Endicott was distressed at the knowledge that the Bradford
party had not yet arrived. Anxiously he and the members of his
Council fixed their eyes upon the wind-whipped ocean for a last sur-
vey of the southern coast line along which the Plymouth craft must
approach their harbor. There was not a sail in sight. Reluctantly,
therefore, the Governor, the ministers and members of the governing
board, turned away from the eminence on which they had gathered,
to make their way in solemn procession to the grove where the con-
gregation had already assembled. The meeting opened with a prayer

35i

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

service in which both clergymen participated. Sermons of extraordi-
nary length, by each of the two ministers, consumed a good part of
the day. In every pause in the services John Endicott turned his eyes
anxiously to the water front. The non-appearance of the Plymouth
delegation troubled him greatly. It was mid-afternoon before the
main business of the day was reached. The Governor now rose to
address the meeting.

“It will be remembered,” declared Endicott impressively, “that
on July 20th we did appoint our beloved friend and teacher, Master
Higginson, to prepare for our consideration this day a confession
of faith, and a covenant of membership. Have you, Master Higgin-
son, brought with you to this meeting the results of your labors?”

“I have indeed, most worthy Governor. But it is, I fear, a feeble
and insufficient declaration of our faith.”

“Then in the name of this plantation I call upon you to read it
aloud. He that hath ears let him hear the words of our brother.”
Fortunately for posterity those words have been preserved. “We
whose names are underwritten,” intoned Higginson solemnly, “mem-
bers of the present Church of Christ in Salem, having found by sad
experience how dangerous it is to sit loose to the Covenant we make
with our God; and how apt we are to wander into bypaths, even to
losing our first aims in entering into Church fellowship; do therefore
solemnly in the presence of the Eternal God, both for our own com-
fort and those that shall or may be joined unto us, renew that Church
Covenant we find this Church bound unto at their first beginning.”
“This, O Governor, and people, is the preamble that it seemeth
to me should precede our articles of faith.”

“Good people of Salem, you have heard the preamble to our pro-
posed articles of faith. Are there any suggested changes or addi-
tions? I hear none, Master Higginson, and so I will ask you to
proceed.”

“That we covenant with the Lord and one another,” continued
the clergyman, “and do bind ourselves in the presence of God to walk
together in all his ways, according as he has revealed himself unto us
in his blessed word of truth. And do more explicitly in the name and
fear of God, profess and protest to walk as followeth through the
power and Grace of our Lord Jesus.”

Continuing, Rev. Francis Higginson submitted nine articles of
faith. The sixth article expressed the animating purpose of the

352

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

founders of the Puritan Church in New England in the following
language :

“We bind ourselves to study the advancement of the Gospel in
all truth and peace, both in regard to those that are within, or with-
out, no way slighting our sister churches, but using their counsel as
need shall be; nor laying a stumbling block before any, no not even
the Indians, whose good we desire to promote, and so to converse
that we may avoid the very appearance of evil.”

The eighth article was brief and intensely practical.

“We resolve to approve ourselves to the Lord in our particular
callings, shunning idleness as the bane of any state, nor will we deal
hardly, or oppressingly with any, wherein we are the Lord’s stewards.”

The nine articles were thereupon adopted, and the assembly at
once proceeded to the task of electing a ruling elder. Governor Endi-
cott’s concern over the non-appearance of Governor Bradford and
his fellow delegates from Plymouth had increased with every passing
hour. Nor was this uneasiness confined to the Governor alone.
Every person in the assembly shared the growing fears that some
evil had befallen the Bradford party. The breeze that rendered the
afternoon so delightful on shore had by this time raised great waves
on the ocean. These waves might well have proven disastrous to a
small sailing craft, beating its way up the irregular coast. At the
beginning of the meeting both clergymen had included in their prayers
special supplications for Divine protection of their expected guests.
The cloud under which the Salem meeting had been laboring had
assumed darker hues until the final business of the meeting was
reached. All hope of the arrival of the Plymouth delegates had by
this time been abandoned.

It is sometimes observed in real life, however, that when hope
long deferred has given way to despair the event that had so earnestly
been desired suddenly occurs. It so happened on this occasion. Gov-
ernor Endicott was about to put before the assembly the last item of
business on the program — the selection of a ruling elder and two dea-
cons— when the lookout came hurrying to the rostrum for a low-
spoken conference with the Governor. Even before the man left the
Governor and hurried from the place the audience had guessed the
truth — the Bradford shallop had at last hove in sight.

“God be praised,” cried Endicott fervently, “for He hath pre-
served from the perils of the deep our brethren of Plymouth Planta-

353

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

tion. They are even now in the outer harbor and will be with us
anon. But as we wait with thankful hearts let us proceed to the
election of a ruling elder, selecting one whom we love and trust in all
ways, who will be a fitting instrument of God’s will in this community.”

It is quite probable that the two clergymen had previously indi-
cated to leading men among the Salem colonists their judgment as to
the man best fitted for that important post. Henry Houghton was
nominated and as promptly elected to the office of ruling elder of
the Salem church. With similar alacrity John Horne and Charles
Gott were chosen as deacons, all of which was accomplished before
the great moment arrived when the Plymouth delegates, headed by
the Governor himself, came marching up from the wharf.

Governor Bradford’s favorite nephew, Nathaniel Morton, then a
youth of eighteen and perhaps a member of the party, later explained
the delay of the delegates by declaring that they had been hindered
by cross winds. Governor Bradford’s arrival was a signal for one
of the most significant demonstrations in the early history of Salem.
The pious colonists were gathered for the soul-stirring event of the
formal inauguration of their church. The coming of delegates from
the First Church ever established in New England, especially after
all hope of their arrival had been abandoned, was like an answer to
prayer. The Salem colonists were ready to accept it as such and to
accord to their visitors a most fervent welcome.

With one impulse they arose to greet the newcomers. While John
Endicott and his associates in the government of the Colony clasped
hands in turn with the Bradford party as they reached the platform
yet every beholder thrilled with personal joy at the moving spectacle.
It required only the fervent prayer of thanksgiving by Rev. Samuel
Skelton to express in proper manner the emotions of the moment.

Governor William Bradford must have been amazed and over-
joyed at this evidence of fraternal feeling. When he rose to speak in
response to the address of welcome by Governor Endicott, his soul
was uplifted in a manner that was strange to him.

“You honor us overmuch, my dear Governor and people,” he
declared earnestly. “We regret our long delay in reaching your har-
bor but the blessed God hath preserved us to this hour and brought
us safely through the perils of the deep into your midst. We bring
you the greetings and blessings of our brethren of Plymouth Planta-

354

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

tion, nothing doubting that you will find in your church the self-same
blessings and contentment that we have found in our own.”

The Plymouth Governor then briefly outlined to the assembly
something of the experience of his own flock in maintaining a church
organization in which the members had complete authority to decide
matters of policy and of faith, unhampered by governmental decrees
and ancient rituals.

The ceremony of ordaining the newly-elected ruling elder and
deacons now followed — a fitting climax to this momentous meeting.
Morton’s narrative declares that Governor Bradford, in behalf of
the sister church in Plymouth Plantation, extended the right hand of
fellowship to the officials of the Salem church, thus cementing the
bond of friendship between the two churches that was destined to
endure for more than half a century.

355

CHAPTER XIX
The Charter to Cross the Sea

While the foregoing events were transpiring in New England the
Massachusetts Bay Company in London was busily engaged in the
task of preparing for the great migration that was scheduled to take
place during the following year. A notable meeting was held July
28, 1629, at the house of Thomas Goffe, the London merchant, who
was serving at the time as Deputy-Governor. The Company records
disclose the names of the twenty-three members of the corporation
who were present on that occasion. The first important matter to
be presented by Matthew Cradock, the Governor, was the proposed
purchase of a ship of four hundred tons then about to be sold in
London.

“This is a goodly ship,” he declared, “and is much needed by our
Company. So favorable an opportunity to buy a vessel of this size
may not present itself again.”

“But Master Cradock,” interposed George Harwood, the Treas-
urer of the Company, “our funds are scarce sufficient for our present
needs. How may we hope to purchase so great a ship?”

“Truly the Company is not presently in funds, but, Master Har-
wood, we have men in our Company who may perchance be willing to
adventure sums and buy shares in this good ship. The Company will
have much need of ships and shipping. It will be constrained to hire
many transport ships and pay roundly for their use. Should some
of us own the vessel this money will come into our pockets to be used
again for the advancement of our cause.”

The idea found favor with those present. It was discussed at
length. Cradock finally prepared a subscription paper and headed
the list of purchasers of the ship by a subscription of one-eighth share
in the venture. Thomas Adams and Nathaniel Wright signed for
similar amounts. Four others took sixteenths, which together with
subscriptions from two outsiders and from the Company itself com-
pleted the underwriting of the new venture.

The next item of business is thus set down in the Company
records r1

1. Young’s “Chronicles of Massachusetts,” p. 83.

356

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“A letter of the 27th of May from Mr. John Endicott was now
read; wherein, amongst other things, he complains of the profane
and dissolute living of divers of our nation, former traders to those
parts, and of their irregular trading with the Indians, contrary to his
late Majesty’s proclamation, desiring that the Company would take
the same into their serious consideration, and to use some speedy
means here for reformation thereof.”

It is sufficiently evident that Endicott’s letter had reference to
Thomas Morton of Merrymount, whose dissolute manners of life
had for years shocked and scandalized those colonists who had come
to America for the sake of their religion. Morton’s most dangerous
activity, however, had been the selling of guns and munitions to the
Indians. Other colonists realized all too well the grievous danger
to their own safety that must inevitably arise from arming the natives
with English weapons. Morton, as we know, had refused to heed
all protests and had continued the custom. The fact that King
James I, who had issued the proclamation in 1622 forbidding the
sale of firearms to the Indians, was now dead had nullified the legal
effect of the proclamation, a fact of which the astute Morton took
undue advantage.

The record states that the proclamation of 1622 was read to
the assembled members of the Massachusetts Bay Company. It was,
thereupon voted to appoint a committee of four to wait upon the
Lord Keeper of the Great Seal of England, and others close to the
King, to petition for a new proclamation for the “reforming of great
and insufferable abuses.”

It is interesting to note that in compliance with this petition, six-
teen months later, King Charles I was to issue a new proclamation
forbidding “the disorderly trading with the savages in New Eng-
land in America, especially the furnishing the natives in those and
other parts of America by the English with weapons and habiliments
of war.”

The meeting of July 28, 1629, deliberated upon other matters of
importance to the Puritan Colony, but the most significant of all was
introduced by the Governor toward the close of the meeting.2

“For divers months past,” he declared, “we of this Company have
given much thought to the welfare of our plantation in New Eng-

2. Young’s “Chronicles of Massachusetts,’’ p. 85.

357

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

land. Large numbers have been added to Master Endicott’s commu-
nity, or should have long since arrived in New England. Under the
blessings of God we hope to send a multitude thither at the begin-
ning of another springtime. The matter of government of this mul-
titude troubles me greatly.”

“But Master Cradock,” interposed one of the deputies, “we of
this Company have set down rules and regulations for their guidance.
All they need do is to follow those rules.”

“You say truly that we have made rules for Master Endicott’s
guidance. I myself have toiled long hours in writing out letters of
instruction. Yet we live a long way off. We are in London in a great
city. These people live in the daily presence of dangers and of prob-
lems quite unknown to us. How may we hope to make wise rules
under which a great multitude may there live in contentment and
safety?”

“How else may we govern them, or control the affairs of our
Company?”

“That indeed has troubled me much of late. Should we continue
to govern them with a broad ocean between us, there must needs be
much delay and much discontent. We have already given Master
Endicott authority to form a council of advisers, but in my judg-
ment that may not be enough. We are founding what may in God’s
Providence prove an empire beyond the sea. Why not transfer the
government to New England?”

Had the Governor advanced a proposal of suicide for all present
it could scarcely have produced more consternation in the assembly.
The merchants and tradesmen who composed the board of directors
of the Massachusetts Bay Company were financially interested in the
management of the Colony. They still regarded it as a business ven-
ture from which they might, by wise administration, derive a profit.
There was also the natural pride of power that men feel when occu-
pying responsible positions. What wild idea was this, to make a
voluntary surrender of their powers and their honors, and to permit
others in New England to step into their places!

“You may indeed wonder at my suggestion,” continued Cradock
earnestly, “but I am confident that you are not unmindful of the
main purpose of our venture — to provide an asylum for our brethren
in the New World. Some of us may wish to join them there and thus

358

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

to continue in the management of the plantation. Those who cannot
leave England, if they can but see the reasons therefor, will no doubt
be glad to surrender their places to others that can go or to those
who may already be in America.”

“Why are we not better fitted in London to manage this Company
than they in New England? We must bargain for ships and for sup-
plies. We must choose those who are to go thither.”

“What you say is very true at present, but the time must needs
come, and that shortly, when our tasks will be completed, when the
plantation shall become a Colony instead of a business enterprise.
Then, too, there are grave reasons why the government should be
transferred to New England.”

“Do you mean, Master Cradock, that we should send the Char-
ter across the great sea, as well as the government itself?”

“Even so. We cannot tell the day nor the hour when our enemies
may stir up His Majesty, the King, to demand the Charter from us.”
“Do we have any reason to fear such action?” demanded one of
the assistants. “Has the King already made threats?”

“Not at all, but it is well known to us that both he and his council
are zealous to enforce conformity even of those in America. Any
rashness among them or among us might be excuse enough for the
recalling of our Charter. I am convinced that when the main body
of our brethren go to New England next season they should take
the government and the Charter with them.”

“And does that mean, Master Cradock, that you will resign your
office that another in New England may take your place?”

“Even so. Perchance at our next election we may choose one of
our number who may be planning to go to America.”

The self-abnegation of this offer made a profound impression
upon the assembly. Cradock thereupon pointed out that if the gov-
ernment itself were to be transferred to New England, it would serve
to encourage persons of worth and quality to transplant themselves
and their families thither. The minutes of the meeting of July 28,
1629, contain the following significant language:

“This business occasioned some debate; but by reason of the
many great and considerable consequences thereupon depending, it was
not now resolved upon, but those present are desired privately and
seriously to consider hereof, and to set down their particular reasons

359

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

in writing pro et contra; and to produce the same at the next General
Court; where they being reduced to heads, and maturely considered
of, the Company may then proceed to a final resolution thereon. And
in the meantime they are desired to carry this business secretly, that
the same be not divulged.”

The reason for secrecy was obvious. If the King and his advisers
should learn of the plan they might take measures immediately to
restrain the Company from transporting the Charter out of the
Kingdom. This secrecy should not be construed as an act of bad
faith on the part of the Puritan leaders. The fact is that in all
previous charters for the laying down of colonies in America there
had been a definite clause therein requiring the chief government of
such Colony to be, and to remain, in England. Such clause was not
inserted in the Charter of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. It is clear,
therefore, that the omission was to pave the way for a removal of the
government to America.

We have the testimony of John Winthrop, one of the leaders of
the movement, that the attention of the King and Council was called
to the subject when the first draft of the Charter was made. Writing
in 1644 Winthrop declared:

“The last clause (i. e., of the charter) is for the governing of
the inhabitants within the plantation. For it being the manner for
such as procured patents for Virginia, Bermudas, and the West
Indies to keep the chief government in the hands of the Company
residing in England (and so this was intended and with much diffi-
culty we got it abscinded).”

King Charles I had, no doubt, reluctantly consented to the omis-
sion of the requirement that the government of the Colony remain
within the realm of England. The King had already repudiated so
many agreements, solemnly entered into, that the Puritan leaders were
fully justified in fearing that he might do the like with their Charter
if their intent to remove the government to America were openly
avowed. Secrecy was, therefore, agreed upon by all of those present
at the meeting of July 28, 1629.3

It was too much to expect that so radical a plan could hope to
meet with universal favor. The company at once divided into two

3. Young’s “Chronicles of Massachusetts,” p. 86. For Winthrop’s 1644 dissertation,
see “American Historical Documents,” “Harvard Classics,” Vol. XLIII, p. 93; “Life
and Letters of John Winthrop,” Vol. II, pp. 442-43.

360

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

factions. The Governor was warmly supported by Sir Richard Sal-
tonstall, Isaac Johnson and some other influential members; but there
was an even larger group of directors who questioned the wisdom
of the plan. Since the matter must be decided at the next General
Court, one month hence, the advocates of the removal of the gov-
ernment to America set about the securing of the names of responsible
persons who would agree to emigrate to Massachusetts in event of
such removal of the government.

Sir Richard Saltonstall himself openly declared his intention of
emigrating to the new dominions if they were to be self-governing.
Isaac Johnson, who was a son-in-law of Thomas, the late powerful
Earl of Lincoln, and brother-in-law of the present Earl, declared him-
self of same mind. In pursuance of their plan the enterprising lead-
ers of the movement arranged for a meeting of prominent men to be
held in Cambridge, England, on August 26, 1629, which was two days
prior to the scheduled meeting of the General Court. In this notable
gathering were men whose names are now inseparably linked with
the history of New England. John Winthrop was there. Winthrop,
be it known, had for years practiced law in England. The growing
conflict between King Charles and the Puritan element of the King-
dom had so deeply involved John Winthrop that as early as June
22, 1629, he had either resigned his office as an attorney at law in
London, or he had been ousted from the privileges of an attorney. His
knowledge of and his sympathy for the colonizing movement had natu-
rally attracted him to the Massachusetts Bay Company. He had held
conferences with many of the leading men who were then actively
promoting its interests.

Another notable recruit who was present at the Cambridge meet-
ing was Thomas Dudley, a protege in his youth of the Earl of North-
ampton and later a steward of the Earl of Lincoln. Dudley was now
fifty-two years of age, a man of positive opinions whose presence in
any meeting where contentious opinions were likely to be voiced, was
quite certain to be known by the vigor of his expressions.

Saltonstall was apparently the person chiefly responsible for the
meeting in Cambridge. His social rank alone entitled him to pre-
eminence in such a gathering. We find him, therefore, laying before
the assembly the views of the leaders of his faction of the Massachu-
setts Bay Company.

361

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“There is a division of opinion amongst us,” he declared, “as to
whether the colonists of Massachusetts Bay shall continue to be gov-
erned from London, or have their government transferred to them in
America. These be, indeed, troublous times in England. The King
inclines his ear to evil advisers. We cannot know when open strife
may break out in this Kingdom. Many persons who desire as I do
to transport thmselves to America hesitate to go thither unless their
government there can be free from the danger of turmoils in England.”

“And do you mean, Sir Richard, that the Charter itself be car-
ried to America?”

“Such, indeed, is our desire, but there be those in our own Com-
pany who resist such a plan. If we who favor it can prove that influ-
ential and worth while persons who would not otherwise go will never-
theless pledge to remove themselves thither if the seat of government
be removed to America then it may be possible to persuade all that
this plan is wise.”

“I have long meditated upon the evil conditions in this Kingdom,”
spoke up John Winthrop, “and my heart inclines me toward the new
land across the sea. If we may there hope to enjoy a larger liberty of
conscience and there be free to govern ourselves as needs may appear,
then I for one would be willing to go thither myself and to transport
my family with me.”

“These are heartening words, Master Winthrop,” declared Isaac
Johnson. “We need men like you for this new venture. The dis-
sentions in our General Court over transferring the government to
New England are largely due to fear that there be not enough men of
ability going thither to administer so great a trust.”

“That indeed is our chief stumbling block,” added Sir Richard
Saltonstall, “and that is the reason why we have bidden you gentle-
men to meet with us today. Could we but have a few more such
recruits as Master Winthrop we might assuredly convince our doubt-
ing brethren at the General Court.”

All eyes were turned upon Thomas Dudley as he rose to speak.

“I have listened well to this discussion,” he declared, “and I
agree with Sir Richard and others who have spoken that if the Colony
in America is to succeed it must needs have full authority to manage
its own affairs. Relations with the Indians and the French are local
problems that require local treatment. Traders along the coast must

362

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

be dealt with from time to time. If we can be sure that we shall have
our own government, then even at my age, I will venture to cross
the sea.”

In the midst of the applause that greeted this declaration Sir Rich-
ard Saltonstall produced a written paper.

“I have brought with me,” he declared, “a sort of agreement that
seemeth to us of the Company who favor the project a sufficient
declaration, and I present it to you for signatures. By this agree-
ment we would bind ourselves under penalty to embark for New Eng-
land by next March provided the Company may presently agree to
transfer the government to America. May I read it to you?”

“Read it; read it,” cried members of the assembly eagerly.

The document proved to be of modest length, reciting that the
subscribers thereto had weighed the consequences of emigrating to
America and continuing : “Now for the better encouragement of our-
selves and others that shall join with us in this action, and to the end
that every man may without scruple dispose of his estate and affairs
as may best fit his preparation for this voyage ; it is fully and faith-
fully agreed amongst us .... we will be ready in our persons, and
with such of our several families as are to go with us, and such provi-
sions as we are able conveniently to furnish ourselves withal, to
embark for the said plantation by the first of March next, at such
port or ports of this land as shall be agreed upon by the Company,
to the end to pass the seas, (under God’s protection) to inhabit and
continue in New England.”4

The exact wording of this historic document should be of extreme
interest to students of American history. It throws a flood of light
upon the mystery of why the Charter of Massachusetts was sent to
America, in the first instance. It is not too much to say that had the
Charter remained in England the whole course of modern history
might have been changed. The fact that for fifty years the Colo-
nists of Massachusetts successfully contended with Kings of England
over its possession made Massachusetts a training ground for that
spirit of independence that eventually led to the American Revolu-
tion, and to similar revolutions in other parts of the world.

There was one significant clause in the “agreement of Cambridge,”
as it is now called, that discloses the true purpose of the meeting,
since the entire agreement was conditioned upon it:

4. Young’s “Chronicles of New England,” pp. 281-82.

363

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“Provided always, that before the last of September next, the
whole government, together with the patent for the said plantation,
be first, by an order of court (i. e., the General Court or assembly of
the Massachusetts Bay Company), legally transferred and estab-
lished to remain with us and others which shall inhabit upon the said
plantation.”

The final clause of the document carries the following significant
penalties :

“And we do further promise, every one for himself, that shall fail
to be ready though his own default by the day appointed, to pay
for every day’s default the sum of £3, to the use of the rest of the
Company who shall be ready by the same day and time.”

The twelve signers of this agreement were : Richard Saltonstall,

Thomas Dudley, William Vassall, Nicholas West, Isaac Johnson, John
Humphrey, Thomas Sharpe, Increase Norwell, John Winthrop, Wil-
liam Pynchon, Kellam Browne, and William Colburn.

It subsequently developed that Nicholas West and Kellam Browne
were the only members of the Company of signers who failed to make
good their promises to emigrate to America.

Two days after this memorable meeting in Cambridge, the Direc-
tors of the Massachusetts Bay Company convened in General Court
at the house of Thomas Goffe, the Deputy-Governor, in London.
According to the minutes of the meeting which fortunately have been
preserved to us, Thomas Goffe acted as presiding officer. He stated
in opening the meeting that it was convened “to give answer to divers
gentlemen, intending to go into New England, whether or no the chief
government of the plantation, together with the patent, should be set-
tled in New England or here.”

The old division of opinion at once manifested itself, so the Com-
pany wisely voted to adjourn until the following day during which
time the leaders of each faction should prepare arguments pro and
con, to be presented at the adjourned session of the General Court.
It is significant that the committee appointed to prepare arguments in
favor of transferring the government to America consisted of Sir
Richard Saltonstall, Isaac Johnson and Captain John Venn.

At seven o’clock next morning, August 29, 1629, the committees
met for a final discussion of their points of differences before present-
ing their respective arguments to the entire membership of the Com-

364

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

pany. At nine o’clock the General Court assembled and the great
debate began. Sir Richard Saltonstall and his associates argued with
great earnestness in behalf of the proposal. Nathaniel Wright, who
appears to have been a merchant and possibly influenced by self-
interest to oppose the removal of the government of the Colony to
America, was the leader of the opposition.

The minutes of the meeting thus make record of the epoch-marking
action of the Company:5

“After a long debate, Mr. Deputy put it to the question as
followeth :

“ ‘As many of you as desire to have the patent and the government
of the plantation to be transferred to New England, so it may be
done legally, hold up your hands ? So many as will not, hold up your
hands.’

“When, by erection of hands, it appeared by the general consent
of the Company, that the government and patent should be settled in
New England, and accordingly an order was drawn up.”

Thus the Massachusetts Bay Company definitely committed itself
to the task of empire-building. It was no longer to be a commercial
enterprise in which a group, made up chiefly of merchants, dictated
from London the conditions of life under which men, women and
children were to live in the forests of America. To the far-seeing
wisdom of this action history itself has long since paid tribute. But it
was a daring innovation at the time, a secret to be closely guarded
until the precious Charter might be committed to the custody of the
colonists in Massachusetts with an intervening ocean to protect it from
the hands of King Charles I. Could their design be kept from the
knowledge of enemies until the embarkation of the great fleet in
March of the following year?

5. “Records of Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 51. Young’s “Chronicles of Massachu-
setts,” p. 88.

365

CHAPTER XX

Endicott Rejected as Governor

It will be remembered that John and Samuel Brown, the two lead-
ers of the Church of England wing of the Salem Colony, had been
arrested by Governor Endicott and sent home to England for trial.
They were men of wealth and prominence. Their alleged crime —
to have read the Book of Common Prayer in public — was a right
guaranteed to them by the laws of England and in fact a duty imposed
upon all Englishmen for generations past. The Browns had gone to
America a few weeks before, loyal Puritans who accepted the ritual
of the Church of England as the outward symbol of their religion.
Because they had remained faithful in the face of a successful radical
religious movement that had cast off the Prayer Book and ritual of
the Established Church they were now returning to England in dis-
grace— martyrs to religious duty. What a sensation their story might
produce in England! How furious would be the anger of King
Charles and his advisers when this news reached their ears !

The King was already fully embarked on his fatal attempt to
enforce religious conformity throughout his Kingdom. To have the
tables turned in so brazen a manner in the newly chartered Puritan
Colony — Englishmen arrested as common malefactors for reading
the Prayer Book — could not fail to infuriate the royal tyrant. The
headstrong Colonial Governor had ignored all consequences in arrest-
ing the men; but there were those in Salem, as we have previously
pointed out, who foresaw calamity from this rash action of their
Governor.

The captain of the ship on which the brothers were sent back to
England must have been well aware of the consequences to the Puri-
tan Colony should the victims of Endicott’s stern sense of duty be
permitted to tell their story to the officials of the royal court! Dur-
ing the long return voyage to England he accordingly treated the
brothers with every consideration due to their rank.

John Brown, the lawyer, had been ablaze with indignation at the
outset of the voyage, but as the days passed and endless opportunity
for reflection had presented itself his mood changed. His hatred of

366

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Endicott had not abated, but there were other angles to the case that
one trained in the law could not well overlook.

“Surely the man is mad,” he declared one day in conversation with
the captain. “How else can we account for this outrage?”

“There is madness in his act,” rejoined the other. “Captain
Endicott has long been known as a rash and violent man.”

“Then why did they ever send him as Governor of our Colony?”
“Thereby hangs a pretty tale,” laughed the captain. “Know you
not that John Endicott married a relative — a favorite cousin I believe
— of Matthew Cradock, who is the chief adventurer in this enterprise?
Since Cradock is the Governor-General of the Colony he could send
whomsoever he pleased as Governor.”

“Aha! So that is the way the wind blows. I never could abide
nepotism. But hold! Endicott’s wife is dead. She died last win-
ter. Think you that when Cradock knows that his cousin is dead he
will be so keen to keep this mad fellow in his place as Governor?”
“That is a thought, truly, and it may be that you and your brother
need not go to the King after all. Why not lay the matter before the
General Court of the Bay Company before going farther with the
complaint?”

To a lawyer, thirsting for vindication, so mild a course of action
was highly distasteful. The wrath of King Charles would assuredly
cause the unseating of his enemy. Brown was by no means certain
that the same result could be expected to flow from a private airing
of the matter. John Endicott had powerful friends in the inner cir-
cle of the Massachusetts Bay Company.

“No,” he declared at last, “I am resolved to take the matter direct
to the King.”

“A sad mistake, Master Brown. The King’s wrath once kindled
will not be satisfied by the punishment of one man. You must remem-
ber that the colonists voted overwhelmingly for the setting up of a
new church and the casting aside of Prayer Book and ritual. The
King might take revenge on the entire Colony and wreck all the gains
thus far made.”

“But I have suffered much and my brother also. We have sold
our homes in England. We have gone to great expense to provide
ourselves with goods needful in America. The charges for our voyage
were heavy. Now we are seized upon and shipped out of the Colony

367

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

for no offense whatever, leaving our goods unprotected there. Our
rights as Englishmen have been trampled upon in outrageous manner.”
“Even so, Master Brown, but can you not trust the high-minded
and Godly men of the General Court to right your wrongs?”

“The King is a certain refuge in this matter. Why should I take
chances, after all that I have suffered?”

Such was Brown’s frame of mind as the ship on which he was
being transported approached the English Channel. The captain
had various reasons for solicitude in the matter. He was an ardent
Puritan and in full sympathy with the colonizing movement. Then,
too, he was a practical mariner who had entered upon a service that
promised continued employment of a profitable nature. At his first
contact with land, therefore, he secretly dispatched a messenger with
instructions to proceed posthaste to London, with letters from Endi-
cott and others, together with a private message from himself. His
own letter set forth in detail his reasons for fear that the Brown
expose would be fatal to the Company.

Even before the ship had docked Matthew Cradock had called his
assistants together for a hurried conference. Thomas Goffe, the
Deputy-Governor, was even more agitated than Cradock himself.

“This means ruin to all our plans,” he declared passionately after
the letters had been read to the assembly. “Endicott has exceeded his
authority. He had no right to take such action without first consult-
ing our General Court.”

“It is no more than I could have told you would happen if we
permit the planters to govern themselves. There will be more such
madness, I daresay.” The speaker was one of those who had opposed
the transfer of the Charter and government to America.

“There is no time to revive old differences,” declared Matthew
Cradock impatiently. “We are faced with a great and vexing prob-
lem which if it reaches the ears of the King may prove our undoing.
This letter from the Captain tells us in plain language that Master
Brown is intent on appeal directly to the King himself. You have
been summoned to devise plans, if we are able, to forestall such an
event.”

“John Brown, the lawyer, of all men!” exclaimed one of the
Company. “He is an able man, a contentious man, one who can do
much to injure us in the eyes of the King.”

368

THE OLD STATE HOUSE, BOSTON BUNKER HILL MONUMENT, CHARLESTOWN

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“Just when we require utmost secrecy lest our plans for next
spring be known,” cried Thomas Goffe, “our rash and intemperate
agent in America must needs ruin all by a stupid quarrel with his
betters !”

“Brethren, I pray you, let us face our present problem. John
Brown may land tomorrow. No time is to be lost.”

“Then why not appoint a committee to meet him,” suggested John
Winthrop, “and urge him to attend the General Court in person, he
and his brother. If we show readiness to consider their differences
with Governor Endicott they will surely come to us before going to
the King. If that is done we will be at fault if we do not find a way
to satisfy them both.”

To this sensible and timely suggestion there was instant agree-
ment. Several of John Brown’s closest friends in the Council were
thereupon appointed to wait upon the angry man when he should set
foot upon the soil of England. Thus it transpired that the return-
ing prisoners found themselves welcomed with every show of civility
and invited to present their grievances directly to the General Court,
which was scheduled to convene in London within the next few days.

Fortunately for us the minutes of that session have been preserved.
The General Court was held at the house of Thomas Goffe in Lon-
don on September 19, 1629, with Governor Cradock and his official
family in attendance. The following description of the deliberations
of the Puritan leaders suggests the nature of the stormy session of
the General Court. It is evident that both Browns were present and
at liberty to speak in defense of their own actions.

“At this Court,” the minutes of the meeting ran, “letters were
read from Captain Endicott and others from New England. And
whereas a difference hath fallen out betwixt the Governor there and
Mr. John and Samuel Brown, it was agreed by the Court, that for the
determination of those differences, Mr. John and Samuel Brown might
choose any three or four of the Company on their behalf, to hear the
said differences, the Company choosing as many.”

The fairness of this arrangement is at once apparent. It also has
a very modern ring. Three centuries ago our ancestors had already
adopted the system of arbitration of important disputes. “Where-
upon,” the record continues, “the said John and Samuel Brown made
choice of Mr. Samuel Vassal and Mr. William Vassall, Mr. Simon

369

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Whitcomb and Mr. William Pynchon; and for the Company there
were chosen Mr. John White, Mr. John Davenport, Mr. Isaac John-
son and Mr. John Winthrop, who with the Governor or Deputy are
to determine and end the business the first Tuesday in the next term.”1

When the next General Court convened ten days later, September
29, 1629, the Brown controversy was evidently no nearer a final set-
tlement than before. In fact a further vexatious circumstance had
developed. While on shipboard the two brothers had beguiled their
time during the long voyage by writing numerous letters to their
friends in England. The modern system of governmental delivery
of mail had not then developed. Letters were generally delivered
through the medium of private messengers, or by travellers who
might perchance be journeying to the town where the person addressed
resided.

Thus it transpired that the letters written by John and Samuel
Brown had been in the possession of the captain of the ship when it
docked in England. Because of the controversy then existing the ship
captain had turned the letters over to the officials of the Massachu-
setts Bay Company to be disposed of by them. For more than ten
days these officials had been in a quandry what to do with the letters.
It was natural to suppose that the aggrieved brothers had freely
vented their indignation against Endicott and the other colonists.
Their correspondence, therefore, might prove highly damaging to
the cause of Puritan colonization.

In view of the strained relations that already existed and the dif-
ficulty of keeping the Browns from carrying their grievances directly
to the royal court it was a risky business to detain their letters further.
The matter was accordingly one of the chief concerns of the Septem-
ber twenty-ninth meeting. The minutes of the meeting contain the
following :

The next thing taken into consideration was the letters from Mr.
John and Samuel Brown to divers of their private friends here in
England, whether the same should be delivered or detained, and
whether they should be opened and read or not. And for that it
was to be doubted by probable circumstances, that they had defamed
the country of New England, and the Governor and government there,
it was thought fit that some of the said letters should be opened and

1. Young’s “Chronicles of Massachusetts,” pp. 89-90.

370

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

publicly read, which was done accordingly; and the rest to remain
at Mr. Deputy’s (i. e., Mr. Goffe’s) house and the parties to whom
they were directed to have notice, and Mr. Governor, Mr. Deputy,
Mr. Treasurer, and Mr. Wright, or any two of them are entreated
to be at the opening and reading thereof, to the end that the Com-
pany may have notice, if aught be inserted therein which may be
prejudicial to their government or Plantation in New England. And
it is also thought fit that none of the letters from Mr. Samuel Brown
shall be delivered, but kept to be made use of against him as occasion
shall be offered.2

This drastic action of retaining the letters of the two brothers is
sufficient indication that matters were not progressing harmoniously
between them and the Company. A further complication existed that
property of considerable value belonging to the Browns had been left
in Salem. The owners were already making clamorous demands for
reimbursement. The letters would, of course, prove of great value
to the Puritan leaders if it should become necessary to curb over-
exacting demands.

This same meeting transacted other very important business. It
seems that the legal soundness of the vote to transfer of the gov-
ernment to New England had been questioned. There were those
who claimed that the Company had no legal right to transfer the
government or the patent to New England. It was accordingly voted
to employ a learned counsellor at law to investigate the matter and
to report thereon.

Another action at this memorable meeting of September 29, 1629,
should be of particular interest to students of history. All are no
doubt familiar with the name of Governor Winthrop’s flagship, the
“Arbella.” It appears that at that time the “Arbella” was known
as the “Eagle.” On the twenty-eighth of July, 1629, it had been
agreed that a suitable ship be purchased for the use of the Colony
and ten of the members of the Company had then severally sub-
scribed money for that purpose. The Governor was now ready to
report that he had secured an option to purchase the “Eagle.” He
recommended the ship as in all ways suitable for the purpose in
hand.3 After some discussion the following action was taken:

“And Mr. Governor is desired to go on and conclude the bargain
upon such terms as he can. And it was further thought fit and

2. Young’s “Chronicles of Massachusetts,” pp. 91, 92.

3. Ibid., pp. 92, 93.

371

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

resolved on, that this ship being of good force, and bought for the
safety and honor and benefit of the Plantation, shall always be pre-
ferred in that voyage before any other ships, and to have some con-
sideration in her freight above other ships accordingly.”

There was an element of business sagacity in this vote that should
not be overlooked. The Governor, Matthew Cradock, the Deputy
Governor, Thomas Goffe, and various others of the governing board
had subscribed to buy the vessel on shares. They were virtually vot-
ing to give themselves a preference in freight rates over what they
might be obliged to pay to qutsiders. Thus it will be seen that even
in this group of zealous Puritans human nature operated much as
it is known to operate today among less godly brethren. They were
not above giving themselves somewhat more favorable terms in deal-
ing with their own Company than they would have accorded to
strangers.

There is one other item of interest in connection with the purchase
of the “Eagle,” or the “Arbella,” as it is known to history. The
original vote had been that the Bay Company itself should purchase
a one-eighth share in the craft. When it came to the actual transac-
tion it was found that Company funds were low. At a meeting of
the General Court held October 20, 1629, a vote was passed to per-
mit this one-eighth share to be purchased by gentlemen who were to
emigrate to America.

Returning to the meeting of September twenty-ninth we find that
one of the last items of business had to do with the Brown controversy.

“Upon the desire of Mr. John and Samuel Brown,” the minutes
of the meeting read, “it is thought fit and ordered that they should
have a copy of the accusation sent from New England against them,
to the end that they may be the better prepared to make answer
thereunto.”

It will be remembered that when the original vote was passed to
transfer the government to New England opposition had been encoun-
tered from merchants and others who had invested in the capital stock
of the Company and who perhaps feared that their interests might
suffer by the change. Evidently there had been some understanding
not expressed in the original vote, for on October 16, 1629, we find
the Bay Company earnestly debating the matter of reimbursement of
the adventurers. If the government were to be surrendered by the

372

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

stockholders in the enterprise some means must be found to make
good to them financial losses that might otherwise accrue.

A favorite device of that period in England whereby the King
or private individuals were authorized by Parliament to raise money
without invading the public treasury was the granting of a monopoly
of a given enterprise, such as the salt trade, or the exclusive right
to handle this or that necessary commodity. Trade with the Indians,
whose only valuable commodity for barter in New England was pel-
try, had for a generation or more attracted adventurous English
traders to America. The Massachusetts Bay Charter naturally car-
ried with it the right to regulate the trade in furs. What more natu-
ral action, therefore, than that the Company should now utilize a
monopoly of fur trade in the Colony as a means of solving the
vexed question of how the stockholders might be reimbursed for their
investments? With this explanation we may the better understand
the significance of the following passages from the official records of
the meeting of October 15, 1629:

After a long debate, and sundry opinions given, and reasons why
the joint stock (which had borne the brunt of the charge hitherto, and
was likely to bear much more) should have certain commodities appro-
priate thereunto, for reimbursement and defrayment thereof, and
divers objections being made to those reasons, all of which were
largely discussed and well weighed, the court, in conclusion for accom-
modation of both parts, fell upon moderation (i. e., compromise) as
followeth, viz:

That the Company’s joint stock shall have the trade of beaver and
all other furs in those parts solely, for the term of seven years from
this day for and in consideration of the charge that the joint stock hath
undergone already, and is yet annually to bear, for the advancement
of the Plantation.

It was also provided in this same vote that the cost of fortifica-
tions in the Colony should be borne, one-half by the joint stockholders
and one-half by the planters. This cost, however, was not to include
the manual labor, for it was expressly provided that all men in the
Colony were to be drafted for service in equal proportion until neces-
sary fortifications might be completed.

The expenses of maintaining public worship, the support of min-
isters and the building of churches, were to be borne jointly by the
planters and the stockholders.

373

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

At this same meeting an important step was taken looking toward
the actual transfer of the government to the planters of New Eng-
land. A committee was appointed: ten of the stockholders of the
Massachusetts Bay Company who intended to remain in England,
and eight of those who were to emigrate. This committee was to
draw up articles of agreement under which the transfer might be
made. Sir Richard Saltonstall headed the list of those representing
the prospective planters. Isaac Johnson, John Winthrop and Thomas
Dudley were also members of this branch of the committee.

The joint committee was instructed to render a report at a meet-
ing of the Court of Assistants that was scheduled for the following
day. The minutes of the meeting of the Court of Assistants wherein
the report of this committee was discussed, makes interesting reading:

This Court was appointed to treat and resolve, upon the transfer-
ring of the government to New England; what government shall be
held at London, whereby the future charge of the joint stock may
be cherished and preserved, and the body politic of the Company
remain and increase ;

What persons shall have the charge of the managing of the joint
stock both at London and in New England; wherein it is conceived
fit that Captain Endicott continue the government there, unless just
cause to the contrary.

The last clause in these proposals is very significant. Up to
this time it is apparent that John Endicott, the resident governor of
the Colony at Salem had been regarded by his associates in England
as deserving of reelection to that important office. Here for the first
time an official doubt is expressed as to his eligibility for continued
service. “Wherein it is conceived fit that Captain Endicott continue
the government there, unless just cause to the contrary,” is an expres-
sion that speaks volumes. Endicott’s action in the Brown case had
undoubtedly given the officials of the Company reasons for grave
doubt as to his soundness of judgment. The persuasive John Brown
himself, thirsting for vengeance, had no doubt made the most of his
opportunity to destroy Endicott’s continuance of power. Then, too,
it is but human nature to neglect the absent candidate in favor of those
who are present, and able to conduct a personal campaign of persua-
sion. There were candidates enough for the place as it soon devel-
oped. Sir Richard Saltonstall was known to be ambitious to become

374

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

the ruler of the colony across the sea. Isaac Johnson, son-in-law of
the Earl of Lincoln, was an aspirant for the office. John Humphrey
was a third candidate for Governor; but the most serious contender
of all was the newcomer to the Council, the sage John Winthrop.

Winthrop had certain distinct advantages over the others. In
the first place he had not been in their midst long enough to have
aroused any of the animosities and rivalries that encumbered the
other candidates. He was also a lawyer, more than forty years of
age. His very countenance bespoke wisdom. Surely in him they had
ready at hand a chief magistrate to whom the destinies of the future
commonwealth might safely be entrusted.

In the four days that intervened between the meeting of October
sixteenth, at which doubt was first expressed in the official records
as to Endicott’s fitness for office, and his actual rejection as Governor
we may be sure that lively electioneering must have taken place. That
the Browns bestirred themselves in a campaign against Endicott is an
inevitable conclusion in view of later developments. Thus only may
we explain the significant fact that the Browns did not carry the
story of their wrongs to the King; and yet, so far as the company
records disclose, no definite action was ever taken by the company to
mollify the aggrieved brothers. It is more than probable, therefore,
that a gentleman’s agreement for the ousting of Endicott was the
price unofficially paid for their silence. Thus in four days the stormy
petrel of the Salem Colony was despoiled of his proud plumage and
another was elevated to his place.

375

CHAPTER XXI

John Winthrop Is Elected Governor

The session of the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Com-
pany for October 20, 1629, had been officially designated as the
meeting at which the new government for the Colony should be
chosen. Before the election of officers, however, it was necessary
to take formal action upon the Articles of Agreement that had been
drawn up by the committee appointed for that purpose four days
previously. These provisions were designed to settle the financial
problems involved in the transfer of the government.

When the articles had been read and discussed at some length the
assembly adopted them without further ado. It then proceeded to
choose a joint committee to have charge of administration of the
somewhat complicated business relations of those members of the
Company who were to remain in England and those who were to
emigrate to America.

Saltonstall, Winthrop, Dudley, Johnson and Humphrey repre-
sented the colonists, whereas Cradock, Aldersey, Wright, Hutchins
and Captain Venn were to act in behalf of the English stockholders.
Cradock, it should be observed, had definitely decided to remain in
England. He was a merchant of great wealth and extensive busi-
ness interests. Life as a planter in the wilds of New England could
have no charms for such as he. He was not averse, however, to own-
ing an extensive plantation in America which he proposed to manage
through a local representative. This in fact was a privilege accorded
to each of the stockholders in the Bay Company. Matthew Cradock,
moreover, was already assured of the very profitable concession of
chief patronage of the Colony. To supply so great an expedition
of colonists with goods needful for their voyage and their setting up
in America was an opportunity that the greatest merchants in Eng-
land might well have coveted. Thus it is to be seen that when Mat-
thew Cradock retired as Governor of the Company, which he was
now voluntarily about to do, there was no financial sacrifice involved.
To a man ambitious for power the surrender of the office might well
have involved regrets but, as before indicated, Cradock was a mer-

376

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

chant of varied interests, and not politically minded. He was con-
tent that another should rule, provided a man could be found who
possessed the requisite wisdom and force of character to manage the
Colony wisely.

Several days before the meeting of October 20, 1629, Cradock
had held a secret session or caucus at which a few of his trusted asso-
ciates in the Company were present.

“This matter of selecting a Governor for our plantation,” he
declared when they had assembled, “is of great importance to us all.
We have made trial of the sufficiency of Captain Endicott and are
already involved in difficulties of a serious nature. He is my dear
friend, but he has overmuch severity and rashness of judgment.”

“I am right glad to hear you say this, Master Cradock,” cried
Thomas Goffe. “Endicott would have the whole plantation in mutiny.
We must choose a more temperate man. Sir Richard Saltonstall
might do.”

“Sir Richard has qualities of mind that might be profitable to us
in our government, but he has been bred a gentleman, and I fear
greatly that he will not long remain in so barbarous a land as New
England.”

“Isaac Johnson would be a likely Governor,” suggested another
of the party. “He is a man of piety and wealth and Lady Arbella,
his wife, is of the noble family of the Earls of Lincoln.”

“That is true enough,” rejoined Cradock, “but Master Johnson
lacks training in governmental affairs. He is perhaps too gentle by
nature to serve us well. What think you of Master Winthrop? Is
he not the right man for the place?”

“A fine man indeed,” declared Thomas Goffe, “but Master Win-
throp has never mentioned to me in our conversations that he even
desireth the task.”

“Nor is it needful that he should. I have already sounded the
man, and it is my conviction that he will serve us as Governor if the
post comes to him unsought. Master Winthrop is bred to the law.
His ancestors for some generations have been lawyers and men of
wisdom. He has a comfortable fortune and is investing much of it in
this New England enterprise. My heart inclines me to Master
Winthrop.”

The upshot of the caucus was that every man in the group pledged
himself to work among his friends in the company to promote the

377

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

candidacy of Winthrop. Thus without being aware of the fact when
John Winthrop came to the meeting of the General Court of October
29, 1629, he was the proverbial “dark horse” of the forthcoming
election.

It is unlikely that any of the three avowed candidates had per-
sonally electioneered in advance for the honor. Even if they had
done so the Cradock group had prepared so great a surprise for them
that after nominations were made there could have been little doubt
as to the outcome of the vote.

Cradock, as presiding officer, had no sooner called for nominations
for the office of Governor than one of the most influential and elo-
quent of the group, according to prearrangement, arose to place in
nomination the newcomer to their Council who had made so favorable
an impression upon them all. While John Winthrop undoubtedly
knew that his name was being considered for Governor yet he was
nevertheless unprepared for the fervor of the nominating speech or
the acclaim that greeted its conclusion.

However disconcerting this speech must have been to other can-
didates, yet it was too late for last-minute conferences with their own
supporters. Sir Richard Saltonstall was thereupon placed in nomina-
tion. Isaac Johnson and John Humphrey were also nominated. But
when the four candidates were voted upon John Winthrop was elected
by overwhelming vote.

In announcing the result of the election the presiding officer called
upon Winthrop to address the gathering. The latter, although deeply
moved by the unexpected honor and responsibility thus suddenly thrust
upon him, responded briefly. We have no record of his exact words
on that occasion, but we do have a letter written that very evening to
his wife which was no doubt similar in thought to the address made
by John Winthrop to his associates of the General Court.

“So it is that it hath pleased the Lord,” he wrote, “to call me
to a further trust in this business of the Plantation, than I expected

to find myself fit for The only thing that I have comfort of

in it is, that hereby I have assurance that my charge is of the Lord
and that He hath called me to this work. Oh, that He would give me
an heart now to answer His goodness to me and the expectation of
His people.”

It appears from the record that the newly elected Governor was
immediately sworn into office, and he presumably assumed the chair,

378

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

for by the terms of the vote his administration was to begin that
very day. John Humphrey, one of the unsuccessful candidates for
Governor, was thereupon elected to the post of Deputy-Governor.
Under the Puritan plan of government the affairs of the plantation
were to be conducted by a Governor, Deputy-Governor and a Board
of Assistants, with occasional meetings of the stockholders in what
was termed a General Court. It is significant that when the Assist-
ants were elected the names of Sir Richard Saltonstall, Isaac Johnson
and Thomas Dudley preceded that of John Endicott, the former
Governor of the Colony, who was fourth in the list of assistants.
Eighteen men were chosen to this important board. Nearly all of
them were then in England, but planning to go to America. Possibly
the apparent slighting of the officials of the existing government in
Salem was due to expediency. Much business must be transacted
before departure from England, and it might have been fatal to the
enterprise if the newly elected Governor had been handicapped by
possible dissentions in his official family, or if many of his assistants
had been across the ocean and consequently unable to vote upon mat-
ters of great moment.

In the light of history we may safely declare that the election of
John Winthrop as Chief Executive of the Puritan Colony was little
short of inspiration on the part of Cradock and his associates. Here
was a man of tireless energy, steadfast to any cause to which he had
committed himself. While his piety was equal to that of the some-
what fanatical Endicott yet he had a poise of judgment, influenced
perhaps by his legal training, that rendered him the ideal leader of a
great colonizing movement.

With characteristic zeal the new Governor undertook to solve the
great and perplexing problems that had developed in the affairs of
the Colony. It was already confronted by heavy financial obligations.
Its treasury was nearly empty. Many persons who had subscribed
for shares in the enterprise had defaulted on their promises. How
much of this result was due to unsettled conditions in England, or to
waning enthusiasm because of the dubious outlook for success of the
Colony, we are unable even to conjecture.

Yet the election of John Winthrop was the signal for a new
stirring of life in the Bay Colony. Efforts were immediately renewed
for the arousing of interest among the Puritans of England in the

379

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

hoped-for migration of the following spring. For the first time in
history a new commonwealth was to be created and transported bodily
across the seas. The government itself was already functioning in
England. It would continue to function even while on shipboard
during the weeks that the transport ships might require for the cross-
ing. The Colony, with its government intact, would set itself down
in Massachusetts Bay, superseding all previous beginnings of gov-
ernment in the territory covered by the royal Charter.

Upon the shoulders of the new Governor had descended a great
burden of responsibility. Since London was the center of activity of
the colonizing movement it became necessary for John Winthrop to
spend the major part of his time in that city despite the fact that his
wife and family were in Groton, at a distance of two days’ journey
over the bridle paths of the times.

The sifting and choosing of prospective colonists was a formidable
task, since the church credentials of all applicants must be examined
with care and the general fitness for pioneer life must also be deter-
mined before colonists could be booked for passage on one or another
of the ships that were being chartered and made ready for the voyage.
Governor Winthrop was not one who could trust these important
details entirely to committees. He was himself a member of all com-
mittees and no business of importance went forward without his active
supervision.

In the midst of his activities, however, he did not turn deaf
ears to the domestic concerns of his own family. John Winthrop was
essentially a family man. So much has been written about this remark-
able personage in his public character, of his austerity, of his integ-
rity, of his wisdom as a magistrate, that it may be well to explore a
bit of the human side of the great Colonial Governor.

At the early age of eighteen John Winthrop had left Cambridge
University, after more than two years of academic training, to marry.
His bride was Mary Forth, and the marriage occurred April 28,
1605. Three sons and three daughters, two of the latter dying in
infancy, were the fruits of this union. The marriage was terminated
by death of Mary Winthrop ten years and two months after the
wedding. John, Henry and Forth were the three sons and Mary, the
surviving daughter. Three of Winthrop’s children were destined to
figure in the history of New England.

380

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

In December, 1615, six months after the death of his first wife,
John Winthrop married again, only to have his second wife die of
childbirth fever one year later. Two years elapsed before the third
marriage. Winthrop espoused Margaret Tyndal in April, 1618.
That it was an exceedingly happy union is evident from the remark-
able letters, now extant, that were written during the separation inci-
dent to Winthrop’s election as Governor of the Bay Colony. After
eleven years of wedlock and the birth of several children the couple
were seemingly as devoted as young lovers. During his busy days in
London John Winthrop still had the hope of occasional reunions at
his home fireside, but the couple were looking forward with dread
to the necessity of a separation that seemed endless. John Winthrop
himself would go to New England, but Margaret, his wife, because
of delicate health and the care of small children must remain in Eng-
land until the Colony had established some semblance of civilization in
Massachusetts Bay.

Thus there were many cares and worriments of a personal nature
that beset the overworked Governor, clouding his days and even invad-
ing his dreams. His son Henry had married prior to Winthrop’s
election to office; and the marriage of a son or a daughter cannot
fail to impress a parent with the realization that he is growing old.
Henry had been born when his father was only twenty years of age,
so Winthrop, at forty-three, had genuine reason for regarding him-
self as a patriarch in Israel. Pilgrims and Puritans, one will remem-
ber, from much study of the Bible, were prone to regard themselves
as Israelites although they mortally hated Jews, blaming them still
for the crucifixion of Christ. So they appropriated to themselves all
the Biblical promises made to that rejected race. They named their
children with Hebrew names and the custom continued in New Eng-
land for many generations.

John Winthrop’s prominence and his undoubted wisdom had by
this time made him the family oracle. Even his aged father appealed
to him for advice. His relatives relied upon his judgment and, like
all relatives, felt free to call upon him whenever they were perplexed,
however pressing and important the tasks upon which he was engaged
at the time. In the midst of his strenous labors in London in the
weeks following his elevation to office two major crises in the Win-
throp family arose to harass him.

38i

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

The first of these had to do with his sister Priscilla Fones. Like
her brother she had married young. She was now a widow, with
grown up children. At her last visit with her brother John, she had
confided to him, with becoming delicacy, the important fact that a
gentleman of clerical garb was calling upon her with every appear-
ance of matrimonial design. She intimated that it was high time for
her brother to investigate the wooer’s condition in life in order to
advise her whether to encourage the reverend gentleman or to bid
him begone.

John Winthrop, however, was too deeply involved in weighty
matters to devote very much attention to his sister’s romance — pos-
sibly realizing that Priscilla would pay scant heed to any advice that
did not agree with her own inclinations. At any rate the busy gov-
ernor failed to investigate the Reverend Henry Painter. So it
came to pass that on November 17, 1629, Priscilla sat down to write
her brother a letter of reproach for his neglect of her. Priscilla
could wield a pen with the best of her sex but the less said about her
spelling the better, for her score of correctly spelled words was low
indeed.

In this letter she plunged at once into her main purpose and thus
reminded her brother of his negligence.

“As well as I could endure to speak of such business,” she wrote,
“I entreated your help to that end when I parted with you; but see
my answer took not that effect which I did desire, which hath bred me
much grief and trouble of mind, myself being very fearful to change
my condition. All my friends persuade me it will be best for me to
change, but myself hath no heart in it. In the man I see that which I
chiefly aim at in a husband.”

The infatuated widow then went on to paint the manifold excel-
lencies of the Rev. Henry Painter. The moving portion of this
“Macedonian call” was couched in the following language:

“Good brother, help with your prayers and best advice, for I
have now cast myself upon you and my father (i. e., Adam Win-
throp) and Mr. White, to whom I pray make known this business and
crave his council in it.”

The Mr. White mentioned by the sister was none other than the
celebrated clergyman of that name who had played so important a
part in promoting the interests of the Salem Colony. But Priscilla

382

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Fones was not satisfied with mere inquiry as to the suitor’s character
and fitness. She desired that her brother John should meet the man
and discuss the matter at length. This accounts for the following
appeal :

“Good brother, I know your love to be such towards me that I
shall not need to entreat your care in this, but now my request of you
is that you would make all the haste home you can, for we all long
for you.”

Priscilla Winthrop had been married at least twice before this
date. She had a grown-up daughter, Ursula Sherman, by a husband
that had preceded the late lamented Fones. She should have been
entirely competent to manage this Painter romance. In view of the
extraordinary circumstances in which John Winthrop was enmeshed
when this letter arrived he might not have quitted his post in Lon-
don, even for a few days, had not a second letter, written on the self-
same day by his own son, Forth Winthrop, made his return to Groton
imperative.

Before explaining the second family crisis let us glance a moment
at the tangle in the affairs of the Massachusetts Bay Company that
was driving its new Governor almost to distraction. Three ships, the
“Talbot,” the “Four Sisters” and the now immortal “Mayflower” of
the Pilgrims and Plymouth had returned from the New England
voyage more than two months ago and the Company had thus far
been unable to pay the wages of the mariners of the three ships. Quite
naturally the men were clamoring for their pay. This debt was a
much more serious matter than an ordinary indebtedness, since under
the laws of England sailors who may have ventured their lives on
the ocean always found special protection in the courts. How to meet
this situation and to keep the unfortunate affair out of the courts was
Winthrop’s major problem. A public exposure of the virtual bank-
ruptcy of the Bay Company might wreck any chances of attracting
fresh capital, or of inducing desirable colonists to join the movement.
Winthrop was working night and day to increase the financial resources
of the Company.

Forth Winthrop’s letter must have arrived by the same mes-
senger that brought the letter from Priscilla Fones, since as previously
indicated it was written on the same day and in the same town. Pris-
cilla had been too much concerned with her own romance even to men-

383

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

tion the domestic entanglement in which her brother’s son found him-
self enmeshed. Yet it was, or should have been, fully as important
to her as to her overburdened brother, since her own daughter was
the lady in the case.

Priscilla’s daughter, Ursula Sherman, despite the fact that Forth
Winthrop was her first cousin, had found favor in his eyes as no
other maiden had ever done. Just as Henry Painter had discerned
in the mother qualities of womanhood that inspired adoration, so
also young Winthrop had discovered in the daughter those ineffable
charms that every true lover must needs find in his lady fair. The
infatuated swain had progressed from unspoken admiration for his
fair cousin to open confession that he found her society most enchant-
ing. The maiden’s blushes and obvious joy in his near presence soon
brought to Forth Winthrop the disturbing knowledge that a mutual
love had grown up between them.

The fact that Ursula was his first cousin was not, under the laws
of England, an impediment to marriage. The custom, however, was
not looked upon with favor by society in general, since even in those
days the danger to the children of the intermarriage of those closely
related by ties of blood was clearly recognized.

Forth Winthrop, honorable son of an honorable father, at once
took pen in hand to write to his absent parent of the dilemma in
which he found himself. This then was the disturbing second letter
that came to John Winthrop’s hand in London the very eve of a criti-
cal meeting of the General Court.

“I would be loath so far to violate the laws of nature or infringe
the precepts of nurture and education,” wrote Forth Winthrop to
his father, “as to undertake any enterprise of moment without your
leave, knowledge, consent and license. That, therefore, I may have
your counsel and direction I desire that from me you may under-
stand that I do bear affection in such sort as God may approve, and
with your agreement may in time bless with His holy ordinance of
marriage, to my cousin, Ursula, my Aunt Fones’ daughter, yet have I
made no mention of any such thing, nor till I shall know your will,
pleasure and advice herein will I. To your wisdom therefore do I
most humbly submit myself, and earnestly desiring your prayers, that
God may direct me for the best, I shall await the expectation of your
counsel, instruction and direction, what best in your wisdom shall see
most fitting for me to be done or left undone.”

384

FANEUIL HALL AND THE CUSTOM HOUSE TOWER BUILDING, BOSTON

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

The feelings of John Winthrop upon receiving this remarkable
letter may better be imagined than described. Little did he dream
that his son Forth Winthrop, whom he intended for the ministry, was
destined never to attain that goal nor even to wed the cousin whom
he loved so dearly. The father’s heart was moved to go to his son
and his prospective daughter-in-law and discuss the matter of an
engagement of marriage between them.

Under date of November 20, 1629, which must have been imme-
diately after receiving Forth’s letter, which was written on the seven-
teenth, John Winthrop dispatched a letter to his wife in Groton in
which the following significant passage occurred :

“Let my horses be sent up on Saturday or Monday come seven
night (i. e., a week hence), except I write to the contrary in the
meantime, for I will make what haste I can.”

Again on November twenty-fourth he wrote to his wife :

“I know thou wilt consider how it is now with me in regard of
business, which so takes up my time and thoughts, that I can noe more
but let thee know that I have a desire still to be writing to thee, though
I cannot express my love so largely to thee as I was wont to do. I
hope (if God will) to be with thee the beginning of next week; there-
fore let John be here with my horses on Saturday.”

Thus we see the heavily burdened John Winthrop, at his wits’
end to cope with the great responsibilities of the office of Governor
of the Bay Colony, ready nevertheless to respond to the call of home
and family. His sons were very dear to him and surely any son who
could write so manly and eloquent a letter as that from which we
have quoted was a son in whom he might justly have taken pride.

The Governor indeed returned home in response to his promise.
He renewed acquaintance with the Rev. Henry Painter and appar-
ently became convinced that his sister would make no mistake in
marrying the man. Thus Priscilla Fones attained the dignity of
becoming a clergyman’s wife — an honor indeed in those days when
the Puritan clergy were held in great veneration by their loyal
followers.

John Winthrop also took counsel with Ursula Sherman and his
son, Forth, upon the all-important question of a marriage between
them. Here again the verdict was in favor of matrimony and the
young couple presently became engaged to be married. Forth Win-

385

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

throp, however, within a year from this date, and before the wedding
had taken place, fell ill and died, which as we shall see later was one
of the sore trials that beset John Winthrop during his first term as
Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony.

That other trials, none the less grievous, were to befall him in
the coming months is well known to students of history. But of these
crosses and misfortunes Winthrop was at this time happily unaware.
Life was bearing him onward at full flood. The fate of a great
Colony was in his hands and the welfare of thousands of his own
religious faith was upon his heart.

386

CHAPTER XXII.

The Bay Company An Insolvent Debtor

The Massachusetts Bay Company, as already indicated, had been
formed in response to the desire of certain Puritan leaders in England
to establish an asylum beyond the sea for the oppressed adherents of
their own faith. The preaching of the Reverend John White, of
Dorchester, England, had done much to foster the idea of seeking
religious freedom in America. The movement, therefore, sprang to
life as a highly idealistic venture. Could it have been carried for-
ward in that spirit alone there might have been less difficulty in the
founding of Massachusetts Bay Colony. But in order to reach Mas-
sachusetts there was a great ocean to cross, which meant the hiring
of ships and of mariners for extended periods of time. Great quan-
tities of supplies must be purchased. Staggering expenses were neces-
sarily involved.

Thus it came to pass that the large sums that had been advanced
by Matthew Cradock and other wealthy Puritans at the inception of
the movement soon melted away. Within a year from the establish-
ment of the Colony at Salem the Bay Company was virtually bank-
rupt. Since the backers of the enterprise had regarded it not as a
mere philanthrophy but as an opportunity for a profitable business
venture, the appalling drain upon the Company treasury, with vir-
tually no earnings to offset losses, caused many adventurers to draw
back in alarm.

It will be remembered that Matthew Cradock, a wealthy London
merchant, had been the Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Company
during these disastrous developments. John Endicott, Cradock’s rela-
tive by marriage, had been Governor of the Salem Colony. His
severity as a ruler and the fact that he had arrested and sent home
to England for trial two of the most prominent men in the Colony
because they had insisted upon reading the English Book of Common
Prayer in public, had completed the discomfiture of stockholders in
the enterprise. They feared the wrath of King Charles, should the
facts become known.

387

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

In the election of John Winthrop as Governor, not only of the
Bay Company itself but also of the Colony in America the leaders
of the movement were risking all in a desperate attempt to revive a
failing enterprise. Had John Winthrop been an ordinary business
man he could not by possibility have succeeded in his task, because no
profits were possible and none were ever paid to those who invested
funds in the Company. Had he been a mere idealist he could not
have accomplished much in the great task which fate had thrust upon
him. But John Winthrop combined in his own person a certain
amount of business sagacity, an idealism and faith in things unseen
and a tenacity of purpose that could not brook defeat. Such then was
the new leader of the Massachusetts Bay Company, elected to the
office of Governor on October 20, 1629.

For a full month after his elevation to office Winthrop was busy
night and day in a fruitless and disheartening attempt to raise money
for the future needs of the Colony. As a lawyer he was well aware of
the legal implications of the attempt. Should it fail he and his asso-
ciates might be regarded as little short of swindlers for seeking to
induce others to invest capital in a bankrupt enterprise. But an exami-
nation of the books of the Massachusetts Bay Company revealed the
fact that there were enough pledges of capital to have liquidated the
debts of the Company if these pledges had been redeemed. We may
therefore appreciate the earnestness with which the new Governor
pursued the task of persuading delinquent subscribers to make good
on their promises. Not content with the efforts of others he under-
took to make personal calls on some of the chief backsliders in the
movement.

Thus it came to pass that on a November day in 1629 John Win-
throp called at the London office of one of the prominent Puritan
merchants. This man had formerly been very active in the affairs
of the Company. It was not easy to gain admittance because notices
of Winthrop’s election as Governor had been sent out to all share-
holders with a previously written appeal for the payment of pledges.
Winthrop’s call was therefore about as welcome as the advent of a
bill collector. But there was a bond of fellowship among Puritans
that forbade actual discourtesy to so eminent a layman as John Win-
throp. To the great merchant’s presence the anxious Governor was
eventually conducted.

388

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“We have a great project afoot,” asserted Winthrop when the
usual greetings and salutations had been exchanged, “ a project which
under the blessings of God may yield much fruit for His Kingdom.”
“I have heard as much,” responded the other, “and if I may be
so bold as to venture an opinion, it seems to me a plan that cannot
succeed, least of all in gaining the aid of investors in England.”
“But these investors must needs look to the success of the Colony
in America for those ample returns hoped for by all.”

“Very true; but to give irresponsible colonists the right to man-
age their own affairs cannot fail to result disastrously to all concerned.”
“In that sentiment I heartily concur,” responded Winthrop
evenly, “but you are mistaken in supposing that irresponsible colonists
are to have any voice in the government or affairs of the Colony.”
“Judging by the meetings that I attended and by the reports that
have come to me since, that is exactly what we who have invested
moneys in the Company must needs fear. Tell me, Mr. Governor,
was it not voted to transfer the government from the hands of stock-
holders resident in England to those of colonists in New England?”
“There is no gainsaying that fact, but you forget that the trans-
fer is being made to responsible stockholders who are going to
America, such as Sir Richard Saltonstall and Isaac Johnson — ”

“Sir Richard Saltonstall — bah! What does Sir Richard know
about business matters ? How long think you he will stay in America ?
The royal court and princely hall are necessary to one reared as he
hath been.”

“Time alone can answer that question. But there be many other
God-fearing and capable men who have already agreed to sail for
America at the beginning of spring. They may be depended upon to
protect the interests of all concerned.”

“I grant you, Mr. Governor, that they will do as well as weak
and erring mortals can be expected to do, but even they must needs
fail. When once they have crossed the great sea interest of self will
prompt them to favor the Colony and forget those who have made the
Colony possible.”

“I am truly sorry for these doubts and fears, but since the respon-
sibility is upon my head let me assure thee that the stockholders in
England will never suffer for any such cause.”

389

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“Well said, Mr. Governor; but governors are chosen every year
and other colonists may not share your sentiments nor even continue
you at the head of affairs.”

Thus checkmated, John Winthrop could accomplish little in con-
vincing so astute a business man that his investment was safe or that
it would be wise to risk further sums in the enterprise. This expe-
rience was typical of the discouraging round of calls upon delinquent
subscribers. Reports from other workers were alike disheartening.

In the meantime the Governor’s lodgings were much frequented
by anxious creditors, ship captains, sailors, tradesmen, each pressing
his own claim for payment. To one and all Winthrop made the only
answer that was possible under the circumstances — that moneys were
due the company and that he and his associates were making every
possible effort to raise money to discharge all the obligations of the
Company.

Such was the state of affairs when the time arrived for the meet-
ing of the first Court of Assistants of the Winthrop administration.
Despite the fact that Thomas Goffe was no longer Deputy-Governor
he continued to offer the hospitality of the parlor of his London
house for the meetings of the Company. The Court of Assistants
convened on Friday, November 20, 1629, with John Winthrop pre-
siding.1 No group of directors of an insolvent organization ever
assembled with more doleful countenances than the fourteen men who
gathered in the Goffe parlor on this occasion. Each of the men had
a substantial investment in the Company at stake, but there was also
the element of personal humiliation that an enterprise to which they
had set their hands should fail.

John Winthrop was perhaps the exception to the rule of gloom.
One of the latest comers to the Company councils he had consequently
suffered less from the wearing down of spirit and courage that long
months of perplexity had wrought in his companions.

“We must face the facts,” he told his associates in the Court of
Assistants, “and face them with frankness and courage. Truly our
company is in sore straits, but this work is of the Lord and for the
glory of His Kingdom. All things are possible with Him. I have
faith to believe that somehow out of the maze in which we grope
will come light to guide our footsteps. I have called you together to

1. “Records of Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 60.

390

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

seek your advice in some course that we may pursue for the bringing in
of moneys for the payment of present debts.”

“Would God that we could discover such a course!” ejaculated
Matthew Cradock feelingly. “I have been so plagued and harassed
by company debts this twelvemonth that I have advanced large sums
from time to time out of my own purse to quiet the clamor of our
creditors, and yet our debts seem endless.”

“You have indeed earned the everlasting gratitude of this com-
pany, Master Cradock,” declared John Winthrop as he turned him-
self to the speaker. “We must take measure to repay you and to
pay all of our debts. Will you not therefore give us some estimate
of what sums are owed to you and what is still due to the mariners for
their latest voyage to New England?”

“Right willingly, Mr. Governor. I have paid out in the com-
pany’s behalf the sums named in the statement of account which I now
place in your hands. It totals £800. There is still due for mariners
wages upon the ships “Talbot,” “Mayflower” and “Four Sisters,” and
for the freight of those ships, £1200 and upwards, all of which is long
since overdue.”

“Then it appears that we must raise more than two thousand
pounds before we can venture to make plans for next season’s ship-
ping. While this is indeed a grievous handicap, yet I have faith to
believe that with the Lord of Hosts on our side we cannot fail if we
will but acquit ourselves like men.”

“The trouble is not with us, Master Winthrop,” declared Thomas
Dudley, “but with those craven fellows who have refused to pay
the sums promised under their hands when they first joined this
Company. Is there not some way to oblige them to pay?”

“Under the laws of England all those who sign a subscription
paper become bound when action is taken upon their promises. It is
clear that when ships were dispatched to America in reliance upon
these subscriptions, the subscribers became legally liable.”

“Then why not sue them, Master Winthrop?” The speaker was
Thomas Goffe.

“We might in truth sue them in the courts, Master Goffe, but
methinks it would be dangerous to drag our affairs into the courts.
We would then advertise to the world the desperate straits in which
we have fallen and thus furnish our chief enemies with weapons to

391

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

be used against us. We have been in danger enough from the Brown
controversy. No, in my judgment it were wiser to content ourselves
with milder measures.”

“I concur in that opinion,” declared Matthew Cradock, “but the
mischief is that those who have thus far refused to pay their subscrip-
tions must needs know that we dare not sue them in the courts. If
we are to pay our debts, and to provide for the future, we are put to
it to devise other means of bringing moneys into our treasury.”

“That we must, Master Cradock, and this is why I have sum
moned the court to meet with me today. There is one matter, how-
ever, that can and should be attended to at once. In examining the
records of our Company I find that when Master Cradock was Gov-
ernor he had express authority from this court to grant warrants for
the payment of moneys due to creditors of the Massachusetts Bay
Company. No such authority has yet been conferred upon me and I
hesitate to act even upon small bills now in the hands of our Treasurer.”
A motion was thereupon offered to confer upon Governor Win-
throp the needed authority. This motion had no sooner been passed
than a second motion was offered to give pending indebtedness first
claim to sums that might come into the treasury.

“I agree with the spirit of this measure,” declared George Har-
wood, the treasurer, “but it must be remembered that the large sums
that are now due depend for their payment upon the success of this
Company. If we are to refuse to pay the multitude of small charges
that fall due from week to week .... the pay of clerks and factors,
bills for supplies and the like, and tell these people that they must
wait until over £2000 of back bills are paid then we might as well dis-
band at once, for the courts will presently be invoked by those who
can ill-afford to wait and who perchance have no sympathy for our
colonizing movement.”

“Our Treasurer hath spoken truly,” agreed Cradock ruefully.
“My own advances, much as I need repayment, can better wait until
moneys come into the treasury than to have current bills dishonored.
To dishonor small bills is to lose credit immediately and thus to
defeat all of our efforts to revive the prospects of the company.”

The result of the discussion was that a measure was passed giv-
ing assurance to Cradock and other large creditors that except for
the payment of current expenses no other large expenditures would

392

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

be made from the treasury until the back indebtedness might be dis-
charged in full. Since the meetings of the Court of Assistants were
very informal in nature, Governor Winthrop at once sat down at a
desk and drafted a warrant, directed to the Treasurer, for the pay-
ment of £800 to Matthew Cradock, “so soon as money shall come into
his hand.” When this warrant had been duly signed by the Governor
and Deputy-Governor, it was delivered to Mr. Cradock and the
proper memorandum of its official approval was made by the Treas-
urer, Mr. Harwood.

“There is another matter of moment to be considered at this
meeting” declared Governor Winthrop, “and it has to do with the
troublesome matter of the Browns, who lately came out of New
England much against their will. They left behind them, as you
know, sundry goods intended by them for their use in the plantation.
A committee not long since undertook to appraise the value of these
goods, that Master Cradock might purchase the same. It now
appeareth that Master John and Samuel Brown are crying out against
the fairness of that appraisal.”

“They do indeed cry out,” grumbled Thomas Dudley. “No
later than this very morning Master John Brown told me that he had
fallen among cutthroats and robbers who were despoiling him and
his brother of lawful property at a ruinous rate.”

“Yes, and a fair argument he makes of it,” declared Sir Richard
Saltonstall. “I for one am tired of this Brown controversy. Why
not pay the men what they claim the property is worth and be rid
of them?”

“A Solomon come to judgment!” exploded Matthew Cradock
angrily. “Sir Richard hath become a philanthropist at my expense.
I will never consent to purchase their paltry trash at any such figure,
but Sir Richard is welcome to it at any price he may be pleased to
pay.”

“Nay, nay, Master Cradock. Methinks I was overhasty in my
suggestion. You are a merchant and should understand the value of
merchandise. I would not presume to criticise your judgment.”

“Yet something must be done,” insisted Thomas Dudley, “or
these loose-tongued Browns may work us great harm. Why not agree
to reappraise the property when the new government arrives in
America ?”

393

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“But that will not satisfy the Browns,” asserted the Treasurer
uneasily. “They are insisting that since they were arrested and sent
home by the local Governor, the Bay Company should pay them the
full value of their goods and pay them now. They will not wait for a
year until a new appraisal can be heard from.”

“Master Harwood is right,” declared John Winthrop earnestly.
“We cannot satisfy these men by any such delays in settling their just
claims. With Master Cradock’s permission we might agree that he
do presently pay to the Browns the sums already fixed by the Com-
mittee and agree that if a reappraisal findeth that more money is
justly due upon the goods that he will pay the same.”

“More philanthropy at my expense,” growled Cradock. “I have
sacrificed quite enough for this Company without any such hare-
brained agreement.”

“Hare-brained agreement indeed,” retorted Governor Winthrop,
his dark eyes lighting with anger. “Master Cradock forgets that he
is dealing with English gentlemen who would never consent to injus-
tice to any man, either to these unfortunate adventurers or to himself.”
“We must not lose our heads gentlemen,” interposed Sir Richard
Saltonstall. “It is very natural for Master Cradock to doubt the
wisdom of so unusual a plan, but I am certain that he will presently
see how fair and reasonable it truly is. His own agent in New Eng-
land will be able to inspect the goods before they are delivered and
surely no Committee of which Master Winthrop is Chairman will set
a price above the true worth of the stuff. Master Cradock, on the
other hand, would not desire to take advantage of the necessities of
these men.”

“If I have been hasty with my tongue I truly crave the indul-
gence of our Governor,” rejoined Matthew Cradock. “Sir Richard
has well stated the matter. I am content to leave the issue in the
hands of the Government of the Colony when it shall have reached
New England. If therefore the Browns are willing to abide by this
arrangement I will cheerfully pay them at once the amount already
fixed by the Committee and any future sum that may be assessed
hereafter.”

Another item of business to be brought before this meeting of
November 20, 1629, discloses the care with which the officials of
the Massachusetts Bay Company endeavored to safeguard their inter-

394

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

ests against profiteers. A Mr. Beecher, master of the ship “Talbot,”
had presented a request to have an agreement, made by him with a
surgeon named Pratt, ratified by the General Court. When it
appeared that the agreement called for a payment of two shillings
sixpence for every passenger on shipboard the question was raised
by one of the Assistants whether the agreement could be deemed rea-
sonable. In view of the fact that one hundred and twenty-five passen-
gers were involved and also that the surgeon had already been
retained by the Company on an annual salary, it was decided to sum-
mon the surgeon to appear and explain the matter.

Toward the close of the meeting a report was received from an
accountant who had been engaged to examine the records of pay-
ments by the different subscribers to shares in the Bay Company.
Thus the Court of Assistants had before it accurate information as
to the grave state of delinquency that existed.

“It is small wonder that we find ourselves unable to pay our debts,”
cried Matthew Cradock bitterly. “I cannot understand why Chris-
tian men will regard their solemn promises so lightly.”

“Some of these men were most active of all when the Company
was newly formed,” commented Thomas Goffe, frowning angrily.
“The cowards know that we dare not sue them.”

“I would not be too sure of that,” interposed Governor Winthrop.
“If they have consulted an attorney-at-law they know that they are
liable on their promises. Why not proceed as if we were going to
take action against them. Mayhap sundry of them may take alarm
and pay their pledges.”

“You mean, Master Winthrop, that we should threaten them?”
“Not exactly threaten them, but it is customary to send a final
demand before taking action. Let us send them tickets, every one,
with sums due from each and make no mention of what steps we pro-
pose to pursue.”

“I am not overhopeful at this plan,” declared Matthew Cradock,
“but since we have no better plan, let us at once make trial of it and
pray Heaven that it may be fruitful of results.”

Other Assistants being of the same mind the plan was unanimously
adopted. The meeting thereupon adjourned and a list of the delin-
quents was drawn up. Statements of indebtedness were prepared
and sent out that very afternoon. It was on the evening of this day,

395

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

November twentieth, that John Winthrop wrote to his wife asking
her to send his horses so that he might go home for a brief visit. It
will be remembered that he had just received a letter from his widowed
sister, Priscilla, beseeching him to return and pass judgment upon
the matrimonial desirability of a suitor of her own. Priscilla’s own
daughter and John’s son, Forth Winthrop, had fallen madly in love
with each other. There was reason enough for the anxious Governor
to hasten home; but there were other meetings to be held before Win-
throp could hope to absent himself from London.

CHAPTER XXIII
A Preacher Points the Way

In the five days that intervened between the meeting last men-
tioned and the session of the General Court scheduled for November
twenty-fifth, Governor Winthrop redoubled his activity in behalf of
the Company. He had appointed a committee to wrestle with the
problem of the joint stock and how money might be raised thereon.
It did not seem likely to any of them that the old delinquents would
respond to the demands that had been sent out for the payment of
defaulted subscriptions. Some other way must be devised for money
to be raised. Two plans were finally decided upon to be embodied in
the report of the committee.

When the General Court convened on the day specified the first
order of business is thus stated in the minutes of the session :

“A letter of the 5th of September from Mr. Endicott, the Gov-
ernor and others in New England, was now read; as also Mr.
Governor acquainted those present with certain testimonies sent over
against one, William Rovell, Master of a ship of .... , concerning
some insolent and misbeseeming speeches uttered by him in contempt
of the Company’s privileges and government; which is to be taken
into further consideration, and be proceeded against, when other
certificates are come, which are expected, concerning that business.”1

How much genuine indignation is involved in this entry in the
Company records it is hard to say. John Endicott was a stickler for
the defense of his dignity as Governor of the little Colony at Salem.
The charge of “Contempt of the Company’s privileges and govern-
ment” was quite likely the outcome of a quarrel between the auto-
cratic Governor and a choleric sea captain who swore round oaths
and expressed his opinion freely concerning Endicott’s administration.
That the affair was passed over lightly by the Winthrop administra-
tion is evident from the fact that no further entry appears in the
Company records concerning Captain Rowell, thus indicating that
when the supplemental affidavits arrived they were not such as to
arouse the wrath of the Puritan leaders.

1. “Records of Massachusetts,’’ Vol. I, pp. 61, 62.

397

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

At this same meeting of the General Court, November 25, 1629,
there was much cause for serious thought on the part of those in
attendance. One ominous feature of the meeting was the small
attendance.

This fact particularly incensed Sir Richard Saltonstall, who rose
to speak directly after the letter from Endicott had been read and
discussed, with the result above noted.

“This small attendance is amazing to me,” cried the indignant
Knight, glancing at the empty chairs. “Every man in our Company
knows full well that our Charter appoints this last Wednesday in
November as one of the four ‘quarter days’ of the year when we
must then convene the Great and General Court for the transaction of
important business. They know full well that we have grave prob-
lems to decide. Yet they chose to stay away.”

“Even so do rats desert a sinking ship!” commented one of the
members in disgust. But Governor Winthrop turned upon him a face
of angry reproach. “Shame be upon you for such language, yea,
even for such a thought. This is not a sinking ship but a project for
the advancement of God’s Kingdom on earth. Let us remember
brethren that in old time the Lord separated and sifted Gideon’s men
until Gideon had a mere handful of tried and true men of war, yet
with these few, under the blessings of God victory was achieved.”

“Our Governor is indeed qualified to lead us to victory!” cried
the Rev. John White exultantly. “We can and we will turn even this
seeming defeat into victory.”

“While we regret the small attendance of today,” commented
Matthew Cradock, “yet we must needs make a start with the weighty
matters that confront us. Master Winthrop has a report to make.
Let us hear it and if need be carry its discussion into a future day to
which this meeting may adjourn. It may be that we can in the mean-
time shame our absent members into being present at the adjourned
meeting.”

When the applause that greeted this suggestion had spent itself
John Winthrop arose to speak.

“A joint committee of Adventurers and Planters was appointed
at the General Court on October 15th,” he declared. “This Commit-
tee has held many sessions in an attempt to work out some plan
whereby the selling of the joint stock of the Company may be

398

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

arranged. Notwithstanding the harmony and concord that has existed
betwixt us, we have nevertheless been unable to agree upon any one
plan that we might present to this General Court. We have debated
and argued much betwixt ourselves on two main propositions quite
different in nature, but each looking to the clearing of our present
indebtedness and the raising of money for future needs.”

“Master Winthrop, before these two propositions be stated may
we not have the accountant’s report on our financial condition?”

“Most assuredly, Master Cradock. The accountant has made an
estimate of the debts. He finds that the Company is at present owing
some three thousand pounds. Could our brethren who have sub-
scribed funds be induced to pay their pledges we would have toward
that sum nineteen hundred pounds. There is also due to the Com-
pany between eight and nine hundred pounds on the freight of goods
transported by the ships in the New England voyages. Could these
sums be brought in, our debt would be reduced to a small figure.”
“Think you there is any hope of bringing in the pledges now in
default?”

“Very little hope. Time is pressing us to prepare for the going
over to New England, so we cannot delay the raising of moneys.”
“How much does your Committee consider is likely to be required
for that purpose?”

“The Company as you know has servants in New England at
heavy charges. Others must be sent over, so it appears that at least
two thousand pounds will be needful to provide for the necessities of
our servants. Then too we must needs spend another five hundred
pounds to furnish our trading posts with merchandise for trade. It
is needful also to supply artillery and munitions for such fortifications
as will protect our settlements. These will cost at least five hundred
pounds.”

“Then are we to understand that for back debts and future needs
we must straightway raise the large sum of six thousand pounds?”
“Yes, Sir Richard, we are indeed faced with that problem. Our
Committee has been working on two general propositions. In order
to raise this grievous sum the first plan provides that all former adven-
turers at once double their former subscriptions.”

A stormy murmur of dissent greeted this proposal, causing John
Winthrop to pause for a moment in distress.

399

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“Hear me through, I pray you. There is another portion of this first
proposal that calls for the sale of all of the company’s servants in
America, of all cattle and merchandise of the Company. The proceeds
of such sales would be paid in to the underwriters of stock that might
be issued under this plan.”

“Would not this course of action grievously handicap the Com-
pany in establishing settlements in New England?” demanded Sir
Richard Saltonstall.

“There are those who think as you do, Sir Richard, but there are
also others who feel that planters will build their own towns quite as
well without the help of company servants, and thereby take more
heed to the common welfare, having none but themselves to depend
upon. The second proposition is that the old stock be put over into
the hands of certain undertakers upon such conditions as can be agreed
upon. These men would go on with the work of the company and man-
age the business, bear all charges and take their chances of profit or
loss for seven years. At the end of seven years they would pay to
the subscribers of stock the moneys paid in by them and retain for
their own benefit any remaining sums.”

“Why seven years, and how could a profit result to anyone from
such a plan?”

“Hear me with patience, Master Nowell, and you will learn that
the undertakers under this plan would for seven years have the fol-
lowing inducements: One half of the fur trade of the Colony; the

sole making of salt in New England; the sole transportation of pas-
sengers but at reasonable rates. They would also be allowed a rea-
sonable profit upon all such goods and provisions as they might pro-
vide in magazines or storehouses for the use and relief of the
inhabitants.”

“Think you, Master Winthrop, that persons of substance can be
found who will undertake a venture so beset by danger of failure?
There be ships to provide and great expenses to be met.”

“Grave dangers and great risks are frequently encountered by
English merchants and traders. In so worthy a cause I doubt not we
shall find godly men whose hearts will be moved to undertake the
venture, if indeed the company shall vote to adopt this second plan.”

Sir Richard Saltonstall, as a member of the Committee who had
favored the second plan, now launched into a speech in its behalf.

400

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Others joined in the discussion and it soon appeared that the mem-
bers present were divided in their inclinations, just as the Committee
had been. While Governor Winthrop would not have permitted the
matter to go to a vote until a larger number of the members of the
Company were present, yet he welcomed the lively discussion as a
means of arousing interest in the adjourned meeting, to be held on the
following Monday.

Then occurred one of those thrilling incidents, possible only with
a deeply religious group, that sometimes comes to transform a con-
tentious or discouraged assembly into one of faith and courage. How-
ever, these Puritan leaders may have relapsed into hard-headed busi-
ness men whenever discussing business matters, yet there was burn-
ing in the heart of each of them a religious faith that amounted almost
to fanaticism. They took the Bible literally. The God of the Bible
was a jealous God who punished the Israelite of old for neglect and
inattention. The Puritan clergy had long since claimed for their own
people all the ancient promises made to the Jews in the Bible. They
regarded themselves as Israelites and transfixed their unfortunate off-
spring with Hebrew names. There were Abrahams, Isaacs and Jacobs
galore in the Puritan ranks, as well as Samuels, Ezras, Enochs, Eliases,
Joshuas, Zachariahs and Jedidiahs, with many less euphonious Jewish
names. Thus we may glimpse the deep undercurrent of religious zeal
that ordered their daily lives and understand how profoundly any
group of Puritan leaders might be moved by a sudden alleged revela-
tion of God’s will concerning them. Puritan clergymen, in their eyes,
were the annointed of the Lord — men who communed with Him on all
occasions, like the prophets of old.

We have previously noted that the Rev. John White of Dorches-
ter, England, was one of the most influential advocates of the move-
ment to establish a Puritan Colony in America. Not only had he lent
the power of his pulpit to the cause, but he had taken an intense per-
sonal interest in the Massachusetts Bay Company. He was frequently
present at the meetings of the General Court. His presence at the
meeting of November 25, 1629, has already been noted.

As the meeting was about to adjourn the Rev. John White arose
suddenly to his feet, addressed the presiding officer, and, of course,
received instant recognition.

“Brethren,” he began impressively, “I have attended many meet-
ings of this Company. I have witnessed with what earnestness you

401

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

who are in temporal authority over this holy movement have striven
to order its affairs aright. Ye be God-fearing and devoted men. I
have long wondered why the Lord of Hosts hath not hitherto more
bountifully blessed your undertaking. I have wrestled much in prayer
for your cause and not until this very moment hath it been revealed
to me why Heaven hath withheld its blessings from this Company. I
now see it — I see it as clear as day. Our God is a jealous God. You
have sought to go forward in your own strength and in reliance upon
your own feeble understanding. Never once in these meetings has the
Great Jehovah been called upon to bless and to sanctify your delib-
erations. That is why you have faltered and failed; that is why you
wrangle among yourselves. I beseech you, therefore, brethren, before
this meeting adjourns, to adopt an order that all future meetings be
opened by prayer of some devoted man of God.”

The effect of this speech was little short of magical. For a
moment the members of the General Court sat in awed silence, like
men who had seen a vision from on high. Then with one accord the
leaders sprang to their feet, each eager to offer a motion that should
forthwith correct their grievous error. Every man of them was
stricken with remorse that they had so far forgotten the Most High
as to incur His displeasure in such a fashion. Every man was con-
vinced moreover that if they were thereafter to repair their error,
the affairs of the Company must inevitably improve. The psycho-
logical impact of the idea was beyond estimation of value, since it had
come at a moment when the Company was hopelessly divided.

From this meeting of the Massachusetts Bay Company, Novem-
ber 25, 1629, we may trace a custom that has continued to this day in
American legislatures and in the National Congress : the custom of
opening each session with prayer by a clergyman of some recognized
religious denomination. To the Rev. John White, of Dorchester,
England, who was destined never to behold the Puritan Common-
wealth in America, may we give credit for an American custom that
has continued for three centuries.2

The meeting had no sooner adjourned than those who had
attended set about a zealous effort to reach absent members of the
Company, to persuade them to attend the adjourned meeting sched-
uled for Monday, the thirtieth of November. The much-burdened

2. “Records of Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 63.

402

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

John Winthrop left the meeting place, deep in conversation with the
clergyman who had pointed out the way to the victory that now seemed
assured. In his eyes the Rev. John White was a prophet as truly as
the prophets of Israel. It had never occurred to Winthrop to doubt
the power of God to crown their efforts with success, but now that
one of the anointed of the Lord had suddenly revealed the reason
for their previous failures and the means of attaining divine aid, his
heart was filled with rejoicing. So to his lodgings he repaired with
the man of God, to question him on many things.

No doubt his own domestic problems, for after the Monday ses-
sion he was to go home to advise his son and his sister upon their
respective love entanglements, were laid before the wise clergyman
for counsel and guidance. It is more than probable that Rev. John
White tarried in London with Winthrop and other leaders during the
five days that must elapse before the adjourned meeting. Dorchester
was about one hundred and twenty miles distant from London. The
clergyman could not have made the journey on horseback and have
returned in time for the meeting. Yet, as we shall see, the Rev. John
White played an important part in the adjourned meeting.

CHAPTER XXIV
A Reluctant Decision

During the interval between the meeting of the General Court
on November thirtieth the revival of enthusiasm for the cause of
the Massachusetts Bay Company accomplished certain definite results.
There were those who believed that if the old adventurers should
double their holdings of joint stock the problems of the Company
would be solved. Having convinced themselves of this truth they
felt morally certain that all other investors must eventually come to
the same conclusion. Without waiting for the matter to be settled
by a formal vote of the General Court, sundry small investors now
came forward with sums of money corresponding to their former
investments. Mr. Harwood, the Treasurer of the Company, was
thrilled at these unexpected accessions of wealth, but he was also puz-
zled as to his duty in the matter.

Thus it came to pass that he appeared in haste at the lodgings of
Governor John Winthrop. The latter was deep in conference with
some of the chief men of the Company.

“Our Treasurer is right welcome,” cried the Governor heartily.
“We were in fact discussing money matters and by your face, Master
Harwood, I perceive that you are the bearer of good tidings.”

“Good tidings, yes, but puzzling as well. Our meeting of Wed-
nesday was scarcely over before certain of our Adventurers began to
bring me moneys for additional joint stock.”

“And you received it most gratefully, I warrant you,” laughed
Matthew Cradock from his place at the Governor’s study table.

“In truth I received it and gave them the joint stock in exchange.”

“Behold how the Lord works in the hearts of men!” exulted the
Rev. John White.

“A most encouraging development, Master Harwood,” declared
Governor Winthrop. “Why are you puzzled; why distressed over
such good fortune?”

“Only that these men believe that all other stockholders are to
double their subscriptions in accordance with a plan suggested by
your Committee at the recent meeting.”

404

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“But there has been no vote upon the proposal,” cried Matthew
Cradock, aghast. “It is all very well for these small investors to
double their stake in the Company’s fortunes but "for us who have
large investments it is quite another matter.”

“My dear brother in the Lord,” expostulated the clergyman at
his elbow, “you forget the story in the Blessed Book, of the widow’s
mite and how our Lord said that she had given more than those who
had cast rich gifts into the treasury. She had given her all whereas
they had given from their abundance.”

“I know the story right well, Elder,” grumbled Cradock uncom-
fortably, “but in praising the widow our Lord did not say that all
others should do likewise. Men of substance who furnish employ-
ment for others, upon whom so many are dependent for a livelihood,
cannot give away their all lest they starve and those others with
them.”

“Have you warned them, Master Harwood,” queried John Win-
throp, ignoring the discussion of the Biblical example, “that there
is no certainty that the General Court will adopt the plan of doubling
the subscriptions of the original Adventurers?”

“That I have, but they declare their conviction that it should be
and will be adopted. They wish to set an example of faith.”

“Praise the Lord that he hath chosen the simple to lead the way
for the wise and mighty.”

“Aye, Master White, but let us remember that the wise do not
always follow the simple in rash and headlong action.” Matthew
Cradock was not in a subservient mood. He was one of those Puritan
leaders who dared oppose his own business judgment to the more
or less inspired opinions of the Puritan clergy. His faith was tem-
pered by sage experience in worldly matters.

“If these men know full well that they are binding only them-
selves, that the Company may take other action, then we need not
concern ourselves further,” declared the Governor with finality.
Thus the discussion ended and the Treasurer presently took his leave.

When the adjourned meeting was called to order on Monday,
November 30, 1629, affairs of the Company had not materially
changed. At this meeting, however, nearly half of the prominent
men who had been present at the recent meeting were absent. Their
places were taken in large part by others who were prominent enough

405

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

to appear in the official records by name. But there was now a large
attendance of the “generality,” as the Secretary quaintly described
them, noting after the word the figures “twenty-five.” Since there
were fourteen names recorded as of officers and assistants, it is proba-
ble that the twenty-five had reference to the numbers of small stock-
holders present, rather than to the entire attendance at the meeting.

After an especially fervent prayer by a visiting clergyman Gov-
ernor Winthrop rose to explain to the assembly the two proposals
that had been formulated by the Committee and informally discussed
at the previous meeting.

“The debts of our joint stock,” he declared finally, “now total
the great sum of £2500. For present disbursements for the mainte-
nance of Company servants now in New England, and for commodi-
ties for truck with the natives, and for munitions to protect our plan-
tations there is presently needed another £1500. If all of our former
adventurers should double their subscriptions then we might have
enough moneys to carry our project to success. That in fact is the
first proposal submitted by the Committee.”

“But suppose some adventurers will double their subscriptions and
others will not, can any vote of this General Court be binding upon
them?” The questioner was himself a substantial supporter of the
Company.

“No, I fear not,” answered the Governor, with a dubious shake
of his head. “We cannot compel men to invest their moneys. They
must needs act of their own free will.”

“Then if some of us should make this great sacrifice and others
refuse to join us in it, will we not still lack the needful moneys for
the purpose in hand?”

There was no gainsaying so obvious a truth and though the mat-
ter was urged by eloquent and forceful advocates yet when it was
put to vote the proposition was rejected by a large majority.

“There now remains the second proposal of your Committee,”
announced John Winthrop, his face careworn from the anxiety under
which he had long labored. The temper of the meeting was such that
he gravely feared that no helpful action would be taken, thus leaving
the Company in more direful straits than before.

“The second plan,” he continued, “is that ten persons, let us
say five of the stockholders who are to remain in England and five

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

of the planters who are to settle in America, take over the joint stock
of the Company. They will take upon themselves all present debts
as well as the expenses of providing shipping and supplies for the
expedition that we hope and pray may set forth from these shores
next springtime. In return there shall be appropriated to the joint
stock for seven years the following privileges :

“Half the trade of the beavers and all other furs.”

“The sole making of salt for the plantation.”

“The furnishing of magazines for the sale or barter of goods at
profits to be set by vote of the Company.”

“The sole transportation of passengers and goods at certain
rates.”

“How do we know that these supposed privileges may result in a
profit to the undertakers,” asked one of the Company dubiously.

“We cannot in truth be sure that the advantages will outweigh the
costs of the undertaking, but this we know : At Plymouth Plantation
a small group of undertakers are now trying the plan, and it is
reported from reliable sources that the debts of the Colony are thus
being liquidated.”

“Master Winthrop, is it not true that the traders from Plym-
outh plantation are ranging the entire New England coast and that
they have established trading posts in the most likely places for truck
with the Indians?”

“That indeed is the current report, but the savages are numerous
and the traders from Plymouth can scarcely have gained monopoly of
the fur trade of New England.”

“Then is it not true that with so great a debt our own undertakers
may have grave difficulty to win a profit in the venture?”

“Quite true, Master Cradock, but since there is always a risk of
failure in every undertaking, so is there also a possibility of success.
I choose rather to look at the latter possibility. Surely with the favor
of the Almighty we cannot fail.”

“That I am willing to concede, Master Winthrop, but how are we
to know the will of God in this matter? How are we to find men
who are willing to hazard their fortunes in so great an undertaking?”
“With your leave, Master Winthrop, I will answer these ques-
tions,” interposed the Rev. John White. “We all do know how God
hath increased our numbers until all parts of England hath members

407

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

of our faith. We know also how this land groaneth under the iniquity
of persecution of non-conformists and how there is like to be strife
and bloodshed except we find relief from oppression. The way hath
been opened for an asylum for the faithful beyond the sea. Is this
not clearly the leading of the Most High God?”

No one could dispute the logic of the saintly orator. Before the
motion could be put, however, an amendment was offered that in tak-
ing over the joint stock the undertakers should pay only the present
value of the stock, regardless of its original cost. With this amend-
ment the motion was carried by an overwhelming vote.

The Governor thereupon appointed a Committee to appraise the
value of the joint stock. The Rev. John White was named as Chair-
man. His associates were Thomas Goffe, Francis Webb and Increase
Norwell. It was at once realized that this Committee could not pos-
sibly make a fair appraisal and render a report on the day of its
appointment. It was accordingly voted to adjourn the meeting until
the following day, at which time the report would be received and
acted upon.

When the meeting had adjourned the leaders began to realize
that the vote just taken might not mean anything after all. It was
all very well for the General Court to decide that ten men were to
take over the entire responsibility, but how might any ten men be
persuaded to undertake so great a business hazard? The magnitude
of the venture, if the hoped for migration was to occur, was little
short of appalling to men of modest fortune. There were ships to
charter for the voyage and the rates that could be charged for pas-
sage must necessarily be modest indeed. An unreasonable delay by
adverse winds or storms after the embarkation might involve heavy
expenses for board and care of passengers, extra wages for the crews
and additional charges for the use of the chartered ships.

Governor John Winthrop was not the only member of the gov-
erning board to whom these reflections were disturbing. Thomas
Dudley, although a newcomer to the councils of the Company, had
already established himself in the estimation of his fellow assistants
as a man with qualities of leadership. The fact that he was also a man
of substance must inevitably raise a question in the minds of others as
to the appropriateness of his inclusion in a list of five planters to
undertake the venture. Thus it transpired that Thomas Dudley called
at the lodgings of Governor Winthrop that very evening.

408

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

When greetings were over Dudley came bluntly to the point.

“Master Winthrop,” he declared, “I have called to discuss with
you, if I may, what is likely to happen at tomorrow’s meeting. Five
men must be chosen from among those who are to become planters in
New England, to undertake the expenses of the voyage and the set-
ting up in America. While it does not concern me, being a poor man
and already much burdened, yet I am curious to know whom you have
in mind for this risky business.”

“I am right glad you have called, Master Dudley, for I am deeply
troubled and know not what to think of tomorrow’s meeting. Surely
the task will not be laid upon me of choosing five men to serve us.
We must have volunteers. Sir Richard Saltonstall and Master John-
son will no doubt be glad to serve. I had hoped that you might be a
third member.”

“No, no, not to be considered for a moment. The risks involved
are too great for my slender purse.”

“But will you tell me what men of our Company are better
endowed by natural talents, by experience and by wealth than
yourself?”

“No, no, I am not a man of wealth. Nor do I dare risk what
little I have in so great a hazard. Choose whomsoever you will but
leave me out. With yourself, Sir Richard and Master Johnson, it
should not be difficult to find two others, such as Master Norwell, Mas-
ter Humphrey or Master Revell to serve in that capacity.”

Dudley’s words lingered in the mind and heart of the distressed
Governor. Dudley had named Winthrop as one of three men whom
all might look to as obligated to act on this important commission.
If this were true then Winthrop’s election as Governor had committed
him to far greater obligations than he had realized.

John Winthrop was a devout man and somewhat of a mystic. He
had written to his wife on the evening after his election as Governor
of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, his profound conviction that the
Almighty had ordered the affair. The very difficulties which he had
struggled so earnestly to solve in the five weeks that had elapsed
since then had driven him to a state of greater reliance upon his
religious faith.

The night of November thirtieth was therefore one of great
searching of heart, of prayer without ceasing, but when morning came,

409

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

John Winthrop had made his decision. If the Lord should place the
burden upon his shoulders, he told himself, then he would know his
duty in the matter and go forward in serene faith that it would all be
for the best.

No doubt there were others among the Puritan leaders who expe-
rienced misgivings lest the burden be held out to them, but it is
doubtful if any others went to the meeting with the same serenity
of mind that John Winthrop possessed when he entered the Goffe
residence on the fateful morning of December first.

With that tense eagerness the assembled Company awaited the
report of the Committee that had been wrestling since adjournment
with the task of appraising the present value of the joint stock. The
Rev. John White was Chairman of the Committee.

“Our Committee has agreed,” he declared, “that the sums already
disbursed for the public good should not be charged to the ten under-
takers, but should remain to the plantation itself. Under public good
we understand should come the cost of transporting ministers and
their families, the charges for ammunition and artillery furnished the
plantation. Many servants also, transported at extraordinary charges
to the joint stock, do not prove as useful as expected and so will
not yield the undertakers much return.

“Through lack of experience in such matters much of the provi-
sions and goods have been damaged or destroyed in transportation.
Cattle have likewise perished or proved unprofitable. For these
reasons our Committee finds that the present value of the joint stock
is not above one-third part of the whole sum that hath been adven-
tured from the beginning to the present day.”

Had any other than the saintly clergyman, venerated by all, pro-
nounced these words he would undoubtedly have been assailed by an
angry murmur of voices.

As it was the company sat in stunned silence for a moment. Then
one agitated stockholder rose to his feet and requested the indul-
gence of the chair to ask the speaker a question :

“Does this mean, Master White, that we who have adventured
moneys in the joint stock have already lost two-thirds of our
investment ?”

“Not so, for our Committee will recommend, in lieu of the two-
thirds apparently lost, that the holders thereof be granted additional

410

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

land. In valuing the joint stock at one-third we have also considered
the state of the present debts of the Company which the undertakers
must needs assume.”

Various speakers now voiced the opinion that to accept one-third
in place of the moneys originally invested was too great a hardship
to be borne. Others took an opposing view and so a long and acri-
monious debate was soon in progress. It remained for Matthew
Cradock, acknowledged by all to have the greatest investment in the
joint stock, to voice the prevailing opinion when he declared, imme-
diately before the vote was taken, that unless a true valuation of
the present worth of the stock were set upon it no sane men could
be found anywhere in England who would undertake the venture.
Although the loss would fall most heavily upon himself he felt that
it would be wiser to receive one-third of his investment than nothing
at all. He concluded by pointing out that additional land was to be
allotted to all stockholders as a recompense for their losses in this
transaction.

The record of the meeting states that the valuation set by Mr.
White’s Committee, “upon due examination and long debate, was
allowed by all the court.”1 The promised adjustment to the investors
by way of additional land grants was then taken up. Under the origi-
nal plan each investor was entitled to 200 acres of land in America
for every £50 of investment in the joint stock of the Company. The
official record of the new arrangement, as contained in the minutes of
the meeting of December 1, 1629, reads as follows:

“Whereupon it was propounded and agreed by the whole Court,
that the old Adventurers, (in lieu of this abatement of two-thirds of
their adventures,) should have an addition of a double portion of
land, according to the first proportion of two hundred acres for £50;
and that they should be at liberty to put in what sums they pleased to
be added to their former adventures, so as they subscribed the same
before the first day of January now next following.”

It should be noted that sums subscribed thereafter were to be
considered at full value.

When these matters had been arranged and some incidental plans
determined the critical question was reached of who should be included
in the list of ten undertakers, as they were quaintly termed, to assume
the debts now outstanding and to take upon their shoulders the heavy

1. “Records of Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 64.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

burdens of the financial affairs of the Company. In announcing this
important item of business Governor Winthrop set forth in eloquent
language the opportunity of service to a great cause involved in mem-
bership in the Committee of Undertakers of the business of the Bay
Company.

“The hand of the Lord is upon us this day,” he declared. “We
are being tried in the balance to determine whether we be worthy of a
great trust. Our Holy faith is at stake. The asylum which we seek
to perpetuate across the sea for members of our faith stands or falls
according as we respond to this great opportunity. May the Lord
of Hosts quicken within such of you as are able a firm resolve to vol-
unteer for service on this board.”

When he had finished speaking an ominous silence settled over
the meeting. Men glanced at one another. A nervous cough here
and there in the assembly gave evidence of the tense feelings of the
moment. When silence had become distressing to all concerned the
Rev. John White arose in his place and began to speak.

He painted in even more vivid colors than Governor Winthrop
had done the needs of the Company; the nobility of the cause and
the challenge to manhood that it presented.

“Surely there are those among you,” he urged in conclusion, “who
can stand up and answer, ‘here am I.’ Sacrifice it may be and risks
out of the ordinary, but He whom you serve is able to protect and
prosper your endeavors. Stand up, therefore, I pray you and pledge
yourselves to this great undertaking.”

Again there was silence, an uneasy silence as of men reluctant to
refuse the eloquent appeal of the clergyman, yet firm in their decision
to keep clear of a dangerous entanglement. In the midst of this second
embarrassing period of silence a man arose in the rear of the room,
an obscure stockholder of the Company and addressed the Governor :
“Master Winthrop, we must not go forth from this meeting and
leave matters as they now are, else we shall ruin the cause to which
we have given so much. Why not ask the Committee that has just
served us so faithfully to suggest the names of ten men who are quali-
fied to serve us in this great emergency?”

“But these men may not be willing to accept the burdens of the
undertaking.”

“True enough, Master Winthrop, but at least we may have names
of men to whom we appeal and make humble supplication.”

412

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

The suggestion was immediately adopted. The Rev. John White
and his Committee at once withdrew from the room. A buzz of
excited and subdued conversation now swept over the gathering. Mat-
thew Cradock advanced to the Governor’s table and engaged him in
earnest conversation. The wealthy merchant well knew that his name
must inevitably head the list of ten nominees to this all-important
Committee. That he did not relish the predicament in which he
found himself was clearly apparent. John Winthrop was obviously
pleading with Cradock when the door opened and the Committee filed
solemnly back into the room.

Order having been restored the Governor called upon the Rev.
John White as Chairman to report to the meeting the recommenda-
tions of the Committee.

“Under the terms fo our vote of yesterday,” the clergyman began,
“five Adventurers and five Planters are to be chosen as the under-
takers of this great venture. Our Committee recommends this Court
request the following Adventurers to serve us: Master Matthew

Cradock, Master Nathaniel Wright, Master Theophilus Eaton, Mas-
ter Thomas Goffe and Master James Young. Our Committee further
suggests that the following men who are to go to New England may
serve us as the other members of the Committee: Master John Win-
throp, our Governor, Sir Richard Saltonstall, Isaac Johnson, Esquire,
Master Thomas Dudley, and Master John Revell.”

The nominations were greeted with applause of all persons present
save the nominees themselves, who gazed at one another ruefully.
Presently some of them began to make excuses and to urge reasons
why they should not serve on the Committee of Ten. Not all of them,
however, for Governor Winthrop, having already fought the battle
of self-interest and duty arose to address the gathering.

“It ill beseems me whom you have honored with the office I now
occupy to seek to evade the responsibility of this additional duty. If
this indeed be the will of God, and I firmly believe it is, we have no
cause to shrink from its dangers. If the others will serve, I am will-
ing to go forward in the matter.”

. “And I also,” cried Thomas Goffe, who had been a member of
the nominating committee. “That is why I permitted my name to be
included in the list. We be stewards of the Lord and must answer His
call to labor.”

The records of the meeting declare that the gentlemen named,

413

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“upon much entreaty of the Court, did accept of the said charge and
accordingly were chosen to be undertakers, to have sole managing of
the joint stock, with all things incident thereunto, for the space of
seven years.”2

This happy culmination of the long struggle to rehabilitate the
Massachusetts Bay Company had no sooner occurred than the newly
elected managers called upon the court for permission to fix charges
for the transportation of passengers and of freight to New England.

It may be of interest to us of the present generation to know at
what rates passengers were able to make transatlantic voyages three
centuries ago. The records of the Massachusetts Bay Company for
December, 1629, disclose the fact that the undertakers of the enter-
prise, by vote of the General Court, were to provide a sufficient num-
ber of ships for those who might desire to emigrate to the Puritan
Colony at the rate of £5 a person. When we consider that a modern
ocean liner makes the crossing in from five to seven days, whereas a
sailing ship of 1630 required about two months to accomplish the
crossing of the Atlantic, we find the contrast in charges amazing in
the extreme. It was further stipulated by the General Court that a
child at its mother’s breast was to be transported free of charge. Chil-
dren four years or under at one-third the adult rate ; under eight, half
rate; under twelve years, two-thirds rate. There was a provision also
that a ship of two hundred tons should not carry more than one hun-
dred and twenty passengers, and that this proportion of tonnage and
passengers should be maintained in all other ships.

Freight rates were in the same modest proportion, being £4 per
ton from England to America and £3 a ton for furs brought back
on the return voyages, with £2 per ton for other commodities. Is it
any wonder that the prudent merchant, Matthew Cradock, knowing
the hazard to his own fortune, was extremely reluctant to undertake
a venture so foredoomed to financial disaster?

Governor John Winthrop now felt that he had fully earned his
long contemplated visit to his wife and family in the pleasant little vil-
lage of Groton. His horses had arrived on December second, so he
set forth from London, glad to be in the saddle once more, able to
leave the bustle and squalor of the great city and to turn his horse’s
head into the highways of the English countryside.

2. “Records of Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 65.

(To be concluded)

414

The D eath of a Beautiful oman

By Ethel Lyon, Professor of English, Park College,
Parkville, Missouri

his “Philosophy of Composition” and “The Poetic Prin-
iple” Poe states that a poem may have no other purpose
han to give pleasure; “its object is the rhythmical creation
»f beauty in words.” He says that beauty is the sole end
and “beauty of whatever kind in its supreme development invariably
excites the sensitive soul to tears. Melancholy is the most legitimate
of all poetical tones. The most poetical topic in the whole world is
the death of a beautiful woman, and the lips best suited for such a
topic are those of a bereaved lover.” It was never the concern of
Poe to go beyond sensuous imagery in creating poetry. Philosophic
speculation, didactic urges, and complex human relationships held no
interest for him; his desire was to express beauty in a pattern of
beauty.

Dr. Samuel Johnson commented in “Rasselas” that it is not the
business of the poet to number the streaks of the tulip or describe the
different shades in the verdure of the forest. Poe agreed with him to
the extent of saying that the poet need not imitate the exact colors of
the tulip. And Poe more nearly practices according to his poetic
theories than any poet who has used the English language.

Dante G. Rossetti remarked in writing “The Blessed Damozel”
that Poe in “The Raven” “had done the utmost it was possible to do
with the grief of the lover on earth,” and so he had “determined to
reverse the conditions, and give utterance to the yearning of the loved
one in heaven.”

Despite the fact that “The Blessed Damozel” is inspired by “The
Raven,” there is in my opinion a closer relationship between it and
Poe’s “The Sleeper.” One is more aware of physical death in the
last-named than in “The Blessed Damozel,” to be sure, for Rossetti
reveals physical beauty, but not the dissolution of it in death. Although
the lovers are separated and although the maiden in heaven weeps so
that one may hear her tears, the poem is not so deeply melancholy as

415

THE DEATH OF A BEAUTIFUL WOMAN

Poe’s. The death of the sleeper is a beautiful trance, deep and
enduring. Once, however, Poe depicts the melancholy horror of the
tomb in the manner of the graveyard school of England when he says,
“Soft may the worms about her creep.” No such unwholesome mor-
bidity is associated with the blessed damosel. She is a beautiful young
woman, possessed of all physical lineaments, dwelling in a materialistic
heaven.

Similar pictorial qualities appear in both poems:

“Irene has come o’er far-off seas,

A wonder to these garden trees.”

and

“The wonder was not yet quite gone
From that still look” of the blessed damosel.

Descriptions of golden thrones, heavenly ramparts, and golden-
haired maidens are numerous. Some are sound pictures : golden
notes, singing stars, and “opiate vapors dropping drop by drop.”
Thermic sensations are usual:

“And still she bowed herself and stooped
Out of the circling charm;

Until her bosom must have made
The bar she leaned on warm.”

— The Blessed Damozel.

and

“Wrapping the fog about its breast,

The ruin molders into rest.”

— The Sleeper.

Examples of consonance are multiplied: palls — funerals, holy —
melancholy (“The Sleeper”), and hers — years, me — unity, gar-
landed— thread. (“The Blessed Damozel.”)

More beautiful are the assonances of both poems, however:

“The souls mounting up to God
Went by her like thin flames.”

— The Blessed Damozel.

“The bodiless airs, a wizard rout
Flit through thy chambers in and out.”

— The Sleeper.

416

THE DEATH OF A BEAUTIFUL WOMAN

.... “The autumn fall of leaves

The whole year sets apace.”

— The Blessed Damozel.

“The rosemary nods upon the grave;

The lily lolls upon the wave.”

— The Sleeper .

Carefully selected details appeal to the imagination. Color,
rhythm, strangeness, melancholy are stressed in both poems.

These striking examples of similarity might lead one to believe
that the two poems are not unlike in some regards. In metrical pat-
tern, in length, and in consistency of tone differences are marked.
“The Sleeper” falls well within the limits of Poe’s requisite length of
a lyric: one hundred lines. “The Blessed Damozel” is almost twice
that length. In metrical design the smooth, regular tetrameter meas-
ures produce the pervasive melancholy mood which Poe believed to
be best in depicting the death of a beautiful woman. The alternate
tetrameter and trimeter lines of “The Blessed Damozel” give a light-
ness and buoyancy which Poe would never associate with death. The
strange pallor, the strange dress, the solemn silentness contribute to
this consistent tone of “The Sleeper.” All contact with the world
of the living has ceased. Her tomb is the repository of her body and
heaven the realm of safety where she may sleep undisturbed forever.

But the blessed damosel has been transferred from earth to heaven
in full possession of life and physical beauty. Unable to renounce the
life she has enjoyed, she is not the solitary, inarticulate, detached soul
that the “Sleeper” is but a living personality still interested in her
lover on earth. She is not one of the angel-throng flying in the white
light of heaven but a maiden praying and weeping for her lover and
planning for his coming.

These interpretations similar in utterance and yet different in con-
cept appeal to readers of all time. The death of a beautiful woman
will continue to be of interest as long as there is a spark of romantic-
ism alive in the world.

Edwin A. Robinson will not be the last to commemorate the death
of a beautiful woman:

No more with overflowing light
Shall fill the eyes that now are faded,

Nor shall another’s fringe with night
Their woman-hidden world as they did.

417

THE DEATH OF A BEAUTIFUL WOMAN

No more shall quiver down the days
The flowing wonder of her ways,
Whereof no language may requite
The shifting and the many-shaded.

The grace, divine, definitive,

Clings only as a faint forestalling;

The laugh that love could not forgive
Is hushed, and answers to no calling;

The forehead and the little ears
Have gone where Saturn keeps the years;
The breast where roses could not live
Has done with rising and with falling.

The beauty, shattered by the laws
That have creation in their keeping,

No longer trembles at applause,

Or over children that are sleeping;

And we who delve in beauty’s lore
Know all that we have known before
Of what inexorable cause
Makes Time so vicious in his reaping.

418

The Battle of the Kincjuariones

By John J. Birch, Ps. D., Vice-President Schenectady County
Historical Society, Schenectady, New York

the north side of the Mohawk River at Hoffman’s Ferry,
bout ten miles west of Schenectady, New York, there is
State marker calling attention to the historic fact that
ere was fought the “Last Battell between the Mohoakx
and the North Indians.”

The expression was first used in the Indian deed of July 3, 1672,
for the township of Schenectady, the western boundary “endes at
Hinguariones, where the Last Battell wass between the Mohoakx and
the North Indians.” The marker should not be interpreted to mean
that as the “last battle” the fight was continued until the combatants
were annihilated, but rather that this was the last battle in the vicin-
ity of Schenectady prior to the signing of the deed. Later, when the
French came from Canada with their red allies, and when Sir John
Johnson, Butler and Brant menaced the Mohawk Valley there was
a great deal of bloodshed.

A very interesting historical background led up to the encounter.
When the white men first came to North America, the Indians in the
northeastern part of the country were divided into two great groups :
the Algonkians and the Iroquois. These larger groups in turn were
composed of smaller tribes or “nations.” The Massachusetts Indians,
the Pequots, the Wampanoags, the Narragansetts and others com-
prised the Algonkians; while the Iroquois were made up of the
Mohawks, Oneidas, Cayugas, Senecas and Onondagas, collectively
known as the Five Nations or “People of the Long House.” Due,
however, to an ancient feud the Algonkians and the Iroquois were
continually at war with each other. The Mohawks were the most
ferocious and particularly feared by the Algonkians, especially the
Massachusetts Indians and the Mohicans or North River Indians, for
they had been driven from their Mohawk River lands about the year
1600. Cadwallader Colden says :

419

THE BATTLE OF THE KINQUARIONES

I have been told by the old men of the Tribe who remembered the
time when the Mohawks made war on their Indians, that as soon as a
single Mohawk was discovered in their country, their Indians raised
a cry from hill to hill : A Mohawk ! A Mohawk ! upon which they fled
like sheep before the wolves without attempting to make the least
resistance.

So, when the French and Dutch came, their firearms were espe-
cially welcomed by the Indians as more effective instruments of war-
fare than they had heretofore possessed. With these possessions
there commenced not only the rapid elevation, but absolute supremacy
of the Iroquois over the other Indian nations. For three-quarters of
a century — from 1625 to 1700 — the Iroquois were involved in an
almost uninterrupted warfare. After a number of sanguinary con-
quests the Hurons were overthrown and their power in Canada
destroyed. In 1651 the Iroquois expelled the Neuter Nation from
the Niagara Peninsula and established a permanent settlement at
the mouth of that river. In 1654 they nearly exterminated the Eries,
who occupied the south side of Lake Erie and from thence east to
the Genesee and by so doing dominated the whole area of what is now
the western part of New York and the northern part of Ohio. They
had even penetrated into the Naragansetts’ country and robbed them
of wampum and stone implements for which they were renowned.

However, in 1666, the Mohawks received a severe check when
De Tracy burned their three major villages or “castles” on the
Mohawk River in the fall of that year. Nevertheless, they were not
dismayed, for by 1670 they had completed the dispersion and subjec-
tion of the Adirondacks and acquired possession of the country
between Lakes Huron, Erie and Ontario and the north bank of the
St. Lawrence to the mouth of the Ottawa River near Montreal.
They also made constant inroads upon the New England Indians who,
after their partial decimation by the English, were unable to cope
with the formidable Iroquois.

The enemies of the Iroquois very naturally made retaliation raids,
and it was during one of these that the battle of the Kinquariones was
fought. The attacking party was composed largely of Indians of the
Massachusetts tribe, the most numerous and powerful of the princi-
pal nations then living in the area of what is now New England.
Their objective was to attack the rebuilt Mohawk villages on the
Mohawk River. They crossed the Hudson at the mouth of the Hoo-

420

THE BATTLE OF THE KINQUARIONES

sic River and took an ancient cross-country trail to the Mohawk
River. Very likely a large number of recruits were gathered along
the way from among the Mohicans or North River Indians, who had
pledged themselves with the French to war against the Iroquois. It is
undoubtedly through these that the Dutch came to think the attack
was carried on solely by the Hudson River tribes.

Major Daniel Gookin, Commissioner to the Indians of Massa-
chusetts Bay, gives an excellent account of the departure of the invad-
ing band:

In the year 1669 the war having now continued between the
Maquas and our Indians, about six years, divers Indians, our neigh-
bors, united their forces together, and made an army of about six
or seven hundred men, marched into the Maquas’ country, to take
revenge of them. This enterprise was contrived and undertaken
without the privity, and contrary to the advice of their English
friends. Mr. Eliot and myself, in particular, dissuaded them, and
gave them several reasons against it, but they would not hear us. The
chiefest general in this expedition was the principal sachem of Massa-
chusetts, named Josiah, alias Chekatabutt, a wise and stout man, of
middle age, but a very vicious person.” (Chekatabutt was some-
times called Wampatuk. — J. J. B.)

This party arrived at the Mohawk River at the foot of the rocky
Kinquariones, now known locally as Touareuna Hill, at which place
they undoubtedly rested prior to their advance up the river to Gan-
dawague, the first castle of the Mohawks, which seems to have been
their objective. This was a palisaded village of the Turtle Clan, situ-
ated on a high plateau known as the Sand Flats on the western bank
of the Cayadutta Creek near the present village of Fonda, New York.
The journey from the Kinquariones to the village was made doubt-
lessly during the night, for it is recorded that they appeared before
the stockade before daybreak on the eighteenth of August, 1669, hop-
ing thus to surprise their foe.

History is indebted to Father Pierron, a Jesuit stationed at Gan-
dawague, for giving a lucid picture of the encounter. Quoting from
the Jesuit “Relations” :

By eight o’clock in the morning our warriors without confusion
promptly arrayed themselves with all they have of greatest value, as is
their custom in such encounters, and with no other leader than their
own courage went out in full force against the enemy. I was with the

421

THE BATTLE OF THE KINQUARIONES

first to go out to see if, amid the carnage about the palisades of the
village, where so many unbelieving souls would perish, I might not
be able to save some one. On our arrival we heard only crys of
lamentation over the death of the bravest of the village. The enemy
had retired after two hours of most obstinate fighting on both sides.
There was but a single warrior of the Loups left on the ground, and
I saw that a Barbarian, after cutting off his hands and feet had flayed
him, and was stripping the flesh from the bones for a hateful repast.

Unsuccessful in their first assault, the invaders began a siege upon
the palisaded village which lasted for several days. Finally, after
their supply of ammunition was nearly depleted, they abandoned their
futile offensive and started down the valley, evidently intent on return-
ing home.

But in the meantime the Mohawks had dispatched runners to
secure assistance from their other two villages on the south side of
the river. Perhaps the Algonkians suspected this and planned to
leave before they could arrive. The invaders retreated to the Kin-
quariones and turned into the little valley of the Chaughtanoonda
Brook. They encamped for the night, undoubtedly expecting that
once on the homeward trail they would not be pursued. But not so.
The Mohawks, well knowing the route they would take, glided swiftly
and silently down the river in their canoes and on foot, intent upon
attacking the retreating foe. At the Kinquariones, under the direc-
tion of their great chief, Kryn, they divided into two parties. One
party, according to Father Pierron, made a “wide detour” to the
northern entrance of the defile and remained in ambush; the other
climbed the western side of the rocks and descended upon the invaders’
camp. Thus, between the Mohawks at the southern end of the valley
and those in ambush at the north, the invaders were securely trapped,
for the precipitous sides would make it impossible for them to leave
the valley to the east or the west.

Early in the morning the invaders started up the narrow ravine.
Near the end they encountered the first party of Mohawks who had
detoured to their position. A few fell, but the majority turned down
the ravine. Here, after a short time they confronted the other party
of Mohawks who had climbed over the rocks. Now with their enemy
both behind and ahead of them, a battle was inevitable.

There was little ammunition left on either side so that the com-
bat soon became a desperate hand to hand struggle which lasted until

422

THE BATTLE OF THE KINQUARIONES

nightfall made further fighting impossible. Some historians regard
this battle as the greatest ever fought between the eastern tribes of
which there is any authentic record.

Presumably the fight was to be continued the next day, but during
the night the Algonkians eluded the Mohawk guards, if there were
any, and escaped down the trail towards the Hudson River. There is
no record of any pursuit, the Mohawks, according to Father Pierron,
spent the day scalping the slain, tomahawking the wounded, and
burying their own dead.

The Algonkians lost about fifty of their chief men and many
others, but the most severe calamity was the loss of Josiah, who was
killed after performing many feats of valor. Because of this death
the Mohawks judged themselves victors.

What a triumphal party it must have been who returned to Gan-
dawague! Father Pierron, learning of the battle, had left the vil-
lage and journeyed to the Kinquariones. His word-picture of the
return can be read in the Jesuit “Relations.” He said:

We left two days after the combat in company with a large num-
ber, both those who had taken part in the fight and those who had
come to look on. The victors bore the scalps well painted, at the
end of long batons made to support their trophies. The captives,
divided into several bands, marched with singing; and as I perceived
that one of the women had a sick infant which she carried .... I
thought I would do well to baptize it, seeing it was about to die.

Undoubtedly Father Pierron was exceptionally proud of Kryn,
for this battle had greatly enhanced his reputation. The Jesuit “Rela-
tions” says of him: “He was a chief of unusual ability and character
who possessed great influence with his tribesmen.” .... He was
converted to Christianity and “he commanded the Christian Iroquois
who were with Denonville’s Expedition in 1687 and was also promi-
nent in the attack on Schenectady (1690). In the latter year he
accompanied another French expedition against the English settle-
ments and on their return journey was killed (June 5) near Lake
Champlain.”

The “Last Battell” now takes on a new significance, for a few years
after the event (1672) the Dutch and English were able to negotiate
a more or less permanent peace between the two warring Indian
nations, which lasted as long as the Indians survived.

423

Ski

inner an

d Allied Famili

les

By Herold R. Finley, Cranston, Rhode Island

KINNER is an English family name which is derived from
the occupation of dealing in skins. Robertus Skynner,
skynner, and Willelmus de Parlyngton, skynnar, were
recorded in the Poll Tax of Yorkshire, in 1379. Henry
le Skyniar was registered in the Hundred Rolls of the County of
Oxford, A. D. 1273, Robert le Skynnere in the Writs of Parliament
in 1302, and Robert le Skynnar in Kirby’s Quest for Somersetshire
in 1327.

(Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

Arms — Sable, a chevron or between three griffins’ heads erased argent.

Crest — A griffin’s head erased argent, holding in its mouth a dexter gauntlet.

Motto — Nunquam non paratus. (Never unprepared.)

(Arms in possession of the family.)

I. Thomas Skinner, of Bradfield, County Nottingham, England,

married, in the Norton Parish Church, June 21, 1573, Elizabeth Hall.
Children, baptized at Bradfield: 1. Elizabeth, baptized February 20,

I574‘75- 2- John, baptized September 21, 1576. 3. Ann, baptized
January 25, 1578-79; married, in the Norton Parish Church, June
24, 1605, Robert Kirkeby. 4. Roland, baptized November 19, 1581.
5. Ellen, baptized September 17, 1584. 6. Thomas, of Derby, bap-

tized July 13, 1587, died at Ripon, Yorkshire. 7. John, of whom
further. 8. Francis, baptized October 27, 1595. 9. Philip, baptized
July 29, 1599.

(Norton Parish Registers. Bradfield Parish Registers.)

II. John Skinner, son of Thomas and Elizabeth (Hall) Skinner,
was baptized in Bradfield, County Nottingham, England, August 12,
1593, and was buried there December 24, 1656. He married and
had children, baptized at Bradfield: 1. Ann, baptized March 7, 1629;
married, May 5, 1656, John Ibbetson. 2. Thomas (2), of whom
further. 3. Mary, baptized February 23, 1639.

(Ibid.)

424

timer

SKINNER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

III. Thomas (2) Skinner, son of John Skinner, was baptized at

Bradfield, County Nottingham, England, March 17, 1632. He mar-
ried Elizabeth Fox, and they had: 1. John (2), of whom further.

(Ibid.)

IV. John (2) Skinner, son of Thomas (2) and Elizabeth (Fox)

Skinner, was baptized at Norton, January 25, 1653. He married, at
Sheffield Parish Church, June 13, 1699, Olive Shepperd, of Sheffield,
and they had: 1. Thomas (3), of whom further.

(Norton Parish Registers. Sheffield Parish Registers.)

V. Thomas (3) Skinner, son of John (2) and Olive (Shepperd)

Skinner, was baptized at Bingham, February 6, 1701-02. He mar-
ried, at the Bingham Parish Church, October 26, 1728, Mary Little.
Children, baptized at Bingham: 1. Richard, of whom further. 2.

Mary, baptized April 14, 1735; married, May 14, 1770, Thomas
Simpson, of Colton Bassett.

(Bingham Parish Registers.)

VI. Richard Skinner, son of Thomas (3) and Mary (Little) Skin-

ner, was baptized at Bingham, October 10, 1735. He married, at
Bingham Parish Church, July 12, 1762, Ann Barns. Children: 1.

Thomas, baptized at Bingham, July 6, 1765, buried there, August 4,
1767. 2. John, baptized at Sheffield, September 14, 1771; probably
the John, who married, January 4, 1798, Elizabeth Unwin. 3. Thomas,
baptized at Sheffield, April 2, 1775; probably the Thomas who mar-
ried, in September, 1803, Ann Fraunce (France). 4. William, of
whom further. 5. Henry, baptized at Sheffield, June 11, 1782; mar-
ried, at Rotherham Parish Church, June 6, 1824, Martha Slinn.

(Bingham Parish Registers. Sheffield Parish Registers. Rother-
ham Parish Registers.)

VII. William Skinner, son of Richard and Ann (Barns) Skinner,

was baptized at Sheffield, Yorkshire, England, September 6, 1780.
He married, at Rotherham Parish Church, February 2, 1801, Ann
Daws. Children, baptized at Sheffield: 1. Charles, baptized July 1,

1803; married, at Rotherham Parish Church, April 18, 1826, Ann
Washington. 2. Thomas, baptized September 11, 1805. 3. Henry,

baptized June 4, 1807. 4. William, baptized April 7, 1810. 5. John
(3), of whom further.

(Sheffield Parish Registers. Rotherham Parish Registers.)

425

SKINNER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

VIII. John (3) Skinner, son of William and Ann (Daws) Skin-
ner, was baptized in Sheffield, Yorkshire, England, September 4, 1813,
and died in Winchester, Connecticut, December 13, 1873. He was a
scythe maker and followed his occupation in Torrington, Connecticut.

John (3) Skinner married, in Torrington, Connecticut, Catherine
Collins. (Collins VIII.) One of their nine children was : 1. Henry,
of whom further.

(Sheffield Parish Registers. Family data.)

IX. Colonel Henry Skinner, son of John (3) and Catherine (Col-
lins) Skinner, was born in Winsted, Connecticut, February 27, 1844,
and died there April 5, 1921. When his public school education was
completed, Henry Skinner learned scythe making under his father
and in the latter’s shop engaged in that trade for several years. He
was not yet of age, when, with two brothers, he enlisted in the Fed-
eral Army for service in the Civil War. He became a member of the
2d Connecticut Volunteer Heavy Artillery Company, known as the
Litchfield County Regiment, and in September, 1862, he was pro-
moted to sergeant. On March 24, 1864, he was promoted to sec-
ond lieutenant, became a first lieutenant of Company G, August 22,

1864, and at the battle of Cedar Creek was captured while on picket
duty. He was sent to Libby Prison, later was transferred to Dan-
ville Prison, and on February 28, 1865, was exchanged. A few
weeks later, on April 16, he was promoted to captain of Company B,
which he commanded until he was mustered out of service August 18,

1865. His military service continued after his return to civil life with
his appointment as captain of Company I, 4th Regiment, Connecti-
cut National Guard, and he was successively promoted to major,
lieutenant-colonel, and finally to colonel of his regiment. He was
always active in the affairs of the regiment and his interest in their
welfare made him popular among his men. When the regiment was
on duty at the Mexican border he personally interested himself in
providing many comforts for those in his command.

Following his honorable discharge from the Federal Army he
returned to Winsted and resumed his work, which he followed until
the Winsted Gas Company, in 1888, appointed him superintendent
of their plant. On January 17, 1888, he was chosen secretary and
treasurer, succeeding Midian N. Griswold, and on January 8, 1889,

426

SKINNER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

he was appointed general manager in addition to his other executive
post. His election to the office of president of the company, May 14,
I9I3, was accepted as the logical recognition of his distinguished
services in extending and developing the Winsted Gas Company from
a small independent unit to the expansive organization of today. While
he was president of the company he retained the general managership
and filled both positions in a manner that reflected great credit upon
himself.

The Winsted Gas Company was organized October 15, 1869,
with a capital stock of $20,000, and a year later a small gas works
was erected on Prospect Street, Winsted, where business was con-
tinued until 1874. In April of that year, the company was reor-
ganized with a capital stock of $60,000, and a new fireproof build-
ing built on Case Avenue. Joining the company in its early years,
Colonel Skinner’s efforts were largely responsible for extending and
constructing new lines, notably the transmission line to Torrington
and one of his last services was the establishment of the line to Rob-
ertsville. He was one of the first to appreciate the possibilities of
electrical inventions in the public utilities field, and was one of the first
to arrange for distribution of these inventions. His long association
in the industry, his various executive positions and his abundant and
intelligent wealth of information, drew the attention of others who
regarded him as an authority on the gas production industry. He was
widely known and had many friends both in the shops and plants and
among executives in this field.

Politically a Republican, he supported his party but never sought
public office, although he was influential in local party councils. He
was greatly interested in community and civic affairs in Winsted and
in the adjacent vicinity. His genuine kindliness and other personal
qualities won the respect of all with whom he came in contact, and
wherever he was known he was always welcome.

Colonel Henry Skinner married, at Winsted, Connecticut, July 4,
1867, Fannie Eliza Ryalls. (Ryalls VIII.) Child: 1. Besse M., of
whom further.

(Family data.)

X. Besse M. Skinner, daughter of Colonel Henry and Fannie
Eliza (Ryalls) Skinner, because of her father’s desire that she con-
tinue the family connection with the Winsted Gas Company, thor-

427

SKINNER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

oughly learned the operation and management of the company under
his direction, and from 1906 to 1921 held various responsible posi-
tions in the organization. In July, 1920, she was elected assistant
secretary; in January, 1921, became secretary and, after the death of
her father, was elected a member of the board of directors. To her
goes the credit of modernizing and beautifying the offices of the plant,
which, with its landscaped grounds and well cared for gardens, has
for many years been one of the city’s show places.

(Family data.)

(The Ryalls Line)

The old English family name of Ryalls has been variously spelled,
common among the numerous variations being Ryhill, Ryles, Ryhall,
Ryals, Royle. According to Lower’s “Patronymica Britannica,” the
surname was derived from parishes in County Northumberland
so-called. Harrison’s “Surnames of the United Kingdom,” however,
derives the name from the old English ryge , meaning rye, and
h(e)al(h) , a corner or nook, the whole word designating a dweller
at the Rye-corner (Field).

The Ryalls, whose interesting lineage is traced herewith, were
long established at Yorkshire, England, and for several generations
were manufacturers of shears.

(Lower: “Patronymica Britannica.” Bardsley: “Dictionary of

English and Welsh Surnames.” Harrison: “Surnames of the United
Kingdom.” Family data.)

I. John Ryles, of Sheffield, County York, England, was baptized

in Sheffield, July 25, 1561, and was buried there, August 26, 1618.
He married, at the Sheffield Parish Church, February 9, 1585-86,
Cecilia Dale, who was buried at Sheffield, March 19, 1637-38,
“widow.” Children, baptized at Sheffield: 1. Thomas, baptized

August 16, 1586. 2. John, baptized February 16, 1588-89. 3.

Alice, baptized August 20, 1592. 4. Anna, baptized May 1, 1594.

5. John (2), of whom further. 6. Henry, baptized December 26,

1597-

( Sheffield Parish Registers.)

II. John (2) Ryles, son of John and Cecilia (Dale) Ryles, was
baptized in Sheffield, Yorkshire, England, March 21, 1595. He mar-
ried, at the Sheffield Parish Church, May 14, 1620, Elizabeth Bad-

428

SKINNER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

ger, who was buried at Sheffield, February 18, 1650-51. Children,
baptized at Sheffield: 1. John, baptized October 27, 1622, buried

there October 24, 1636. 2. William, baptized August 31, 1625. 3.

Thomas, baptized January 13, 1626-27, buried March 4, 1655-56.
4. Nicholas, baptized June 7, 1629, buried June 13, 1635. 5. Hellena,
baptized March 13, 1631-32. 6. Thomas, of whom further. 7.

John, baptized August 20, 1637. 8. Elizabeth, baptized May 2,

1641, buried January 24, 1647-48.

(Ibid.)

III. Thomas Ryles, son of John (2) and Elizabeth (Badger)

Ryles, was baptized at Sheffield, Yorkshire, England, February 26,
1 633-34- He was a “Nallbladesmith.” He married, at the Shef-
field Parish Church, November 22, 1655, Ann Carr, of Sheffield,
who was buried February 27, 1698-99. Children, baptized at Shef-
field: 1. Infant, buried at Sheffield, August 21, 1656. 2. Sara, bap-
tized March 14, 1657-58. 3. Margaret, baptized January 4, 1662-

1663. 4. Anna, baptized May 20, 1666. 5. Maria, baptized Janu-
ary 31, 1668-69. 6. Jonathan, of whom further.

(Ibid.)

IV. Jonathan Ryles, son of Thomas and Ann (Carr) Ryles, was

baptized at Sheffield, Yorkshire, England, December 14, 1679. He
married, at the Sheffield Parish Church, May 6, 1704, Maria Booth.
Children, baptized at Sheffield: 1. John (3), of whom further. 2.

Jonathan, baptized April 24, 1715.

(Ibid.)

V. John (3) Ryalls, as he spelled the name, son of Jonathan and

Maria (Booth) Ryles, was baptized at Sheffield, September 25, 1712.
He was of the parish of Norton, County Derby, and later of Hems-
worth, County York, England. He married Martha, who was buried
at Norton, December 16, 1762. Children, baptized at Norton: 1.

Mary, baptized March 6, 1741, buried March 25, 1742. 2. Betty,

baptized September 7, 1743. 3. John, baptized November 6, 1745,
buried July 24, 1756. 4. Mary, baptized October 18, 1747. 5-

Martha, baptized September 30, 1749, buried July 24, 1750. 6.

Jonathan, of whom further. 7. George, baptized October 14, 1753.
8. Sarah, baptized July 18, 1756, buried October 13, 1756. 9.

Charles, baptized September 25, 1757.

(Norton Parish Registers.)

429

SKINNER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

VI. Jonathan Ryalls, son of John (3) and Martha Ryalls, was

baptized at Norton, County Derby, England, June 23, 1751. He
married, at Sheffield, Yorkshire, April 4, 1782, Fannie Morton. Chil-
dren, baptized at Sheffield: 1. Martha, baptized May 12, 1785. 2.

John, baptized February 16, 1787, buried June 1, 1787. 3. Jona-

than, baptized September 11, 1789. 4. Sara, buried July 6, 1792. 5.
John, baptized February 4, 179 5; was a solicitor. 6. Joseph, of
whom further.

(Ibid. Sheffield Parish Registers.)

VII. Joseph Ryalls, son of Jonathan and Fannie (Morton) Ryalls,
was baptized at Sheffield, September 16, 1797, and died in America.
According to family records, he sailed from Liverpool to America,
April 1, 1846, and arrived on May 16 of that year, although Shef-
field Parish Registers show the baptism of his son, Thomas, July 11,
1847. He located in Connecticut, where he lived in Lakeville, Terry-
ville, Bristol, Collinsville and Norfolk. In these towns he engaged in
the manufacture of shears and was known as an expert in this field.

Joseph Ryalls married, at Sheffield, England, July 4, 1839,
Eliza Bullus (although family records give her name as Eliza Bul-
croft). (Bullus VII.) Children, baptized at Sheffield: 1. Thomas,

baptized September 11, 1841, buried February 6, 1842. 2. Joseph,

baptized July 1, 1843, buried September 10, 1843. 3. Fannie Eliza,
of whom further. 4. Thomas, baptized July 1 1, 1847, buried in Shef-
field, July 15, 1847.

(Sheffield Parish Registers. Family data.)

VIII. Fannie Eliza Ryalls, daughter of Joseph and Eliza (Bullus)
Ryalls, was baptized in Sheffield, August 5, 1846, and died in Winsted,
Connecticut, February 22, 1912. She married Colonel Henry Skin-
ner. (Skinner IX.)

(Ibid.)

(The Bullus Line)

The origin of the family name Bullus (which according to family
records was Bulcroft) is apparently obscure as neither form of the
name appears in any of the surname books generally consulted for the
etymological derivation of patronymics.

I. George Bullus, of Sheffield, County York, England, son of John
Bullus, of Sheffield, was baptized in Sheffield, August 17, 1567, and

430

SKINNER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

was buried there September n, 1612. He married, in the Sheffield
Parish Church, July 15, 1582, Anna Bright, who was buried in Shef-
field, May 26, 1615, a “widow.” Children, baptized at Sheffield: 1.

Anna, baptized May 31, 1583, buried in Sheffield, July 12, 1584. 2.

John, baptized July 8, 1585, buried in Sheffield, July 23, 1585. 3.

George, baptized July 10, 1586. 4. Nicholas, baptized July 12, 1587.

5. Jasper, baptized August 10, 1589. 6. Katherine, baptized Febru-

ary 20, 1591-92. 7. Bridget, baptized July 7, 1594. 8. Hellena, bap-
tized July 7, 1596. 9. Thomas, baptized August 10, 1598, buried in
Sheffield, August 31, 1600. 10. Gabriel, baptized October 10, 1601,

buried in Sheffield, November 24, 1602. 11. Elizabeth, baptized

December 31, 1603. 12. Anna, baptized August 18, 1605, buried in

Sheffield, October 18, 1606. 13. Thomas, of whom further.

(Sheffield Parish Registers.)

II. Thomas Bullus, son of George and Anna (Bright) Bullus,

was baptized in Sheffield, County York, England, July 10, 1608, and
was buried there March 5, 1639-40. He married, in the Sheffield
Parish Church, November 25, 1624, Maria Coole. Children, bap-
tized at Sheffield: 1. Elizabeth, baptized February 24, 1627-28. 2.

Anna, baptized October 17, 1630. 3. Kathleen, baptized February

7, 1632-33. 4. Thomas (2), of whom further.

(Ibid.)

III. Thomas (2) Bullus , son of Thomas and Maria (Coole) Bul-

lus, was baptized at Sheffield, County York, England, July 22, 1638.
He married, in Sheffield Parish Church, March 26, 1662-63, Alice
Woodhouse. Children, baptized at Sheffield: 1. Thomas, baptized

May 31, 1663. 2. Maria, baptized June 4, 1665. 3. Joshua, bap-
tized June 30, 1667. 4. Martha, baptized October 20, 1669. 5.

Hanna, baptized April 2, 1672, buried in Sheffield, February 3, 1677.

6. Joseph, of whom further. 7. Ruth, baptized March 14, 1679-80.

8. Benjamin, baptized December 30, 1681.

(Ibid.)

IV. Joseph Bullus , son of Thomas (2) and Alice (Woodhouse)
Bullus, was baptized in Sheffield, County York, England, December 9,
1675, and was a cutler there. He married, in the Sheffield Parish
Church, May 6, 1703, Maria Booth. Children, baptized at Shef-

43i

SKINNER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

field: i. Joseph, baptized October 19, 1704. 2. Thomas, baptized

January 4, 1705-06. 3. Martha, baptized January 2, 1707-08. 4.

Sara, baptized August 24, 1709. 5. Mary, baptized September 20,

1711. 6. Sara, baptized November 19, 1712. 7. Joseph, baptized

January 12, 1714-15. 8. George, of whom further.

(Ibid.)

V. George Bullus, son of Joseph and Maria (Booth) Bullus, was
baptized at Sheffield, County York, England, April 2, 1716. He mar-
ried, in Sheffield, September 14, 1752, Sara Hawke. Children, bap-
tized at Sheffield: 1. Joseph, baptized July 6, 1754. 2. George (2),
of whom further. 3. Mary, baptized April 4, 1758.

(Ibid.)

VI. George (2) Bullus, son of George and Sara (Hawkes) Bul-
lus, was baptized in Sheffield, County York, England, June 8, 1756-57.
He is said to have been the son of a retired army officer, a man of
wealth, who followed the sea during his active life.

George Bullus married, in Sheffield, February 4, 1793, Alathea
Newton. Children, baptized at Sheffield: 1. Thomas, baptized

November 6, L795 ; he spent his life at sea, against his father’s wishes,
not coming home until in his old age. 2. Lydia, baptized February
4, 1798. 3. Alathea, baptized June 12, 1801. 4. Eliza, of whom

further.

(Ibid.)

VII. Eliza Bullus, daughter of George (2) and Alathea (New-
ton) Bullus, was baptized in Sheffield, County York, England, Feb-
ruary 6, 1803. She married Joseph Ryalls. (Ryalls VII.)

(Ibid.)

(The Collins Line)

Arms — Gules, on a bend or, three martlets azure, all within a bordure ermine.

Crest — A demi-griffin or, beaked and legged gules, collared ermine.

(Burke : “General Armory.” Arms in possession of the family.)

Collins, the surname, also spelled Collin, Collis, Codings, Collinge,
is of baptismal origin, from the son of Nicholas, from the nickname
and diminutive Coll, Collin. In the Hundred Rolls, 1273 A. D.,
appears Colinus de Newill, County Lincoln; Alan Colin, County Nor-
folk; and John fil. Colini, County Suffolk. Other records of the
name occur in Kirby’s Quest, which mentions John Colyngs, and in

432

(Tolling

SKINNER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

the Poll Tax of Yorkshire, 1379, which mentions Johannes Colinson
and Colin serviens Johann’ Vest.

(Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

/. Thomas Collin, of Sheffield, married, in Sheffield Parish
Church, Yorkshire, England, October 22, 1593, Elizabeth Clayton,
who was buried in Sheffield, June 6, 1623. Children, baptized at
Sheffield: 1. John, baptized March 23, 1594-95, buried April 9, 1597.
2. Thomas (2), of whom further. 3. Hellena, baptized December 3,
1599, buried in Norton, County Derby, England, June 29, 1631;
married, in Sheffield Parish Church, February 11, 1621-22, Thomas
Greene, of Heeley; children, baptized at Norton: i. Margaret, bap-
tized June 24, 1626. ii. Thomas, baptized December 27, 1628. iii.
John, baptized December 9, 1629.

(Sheffield Parish Registers. Norton Parish Registers.)

II. Thomas (2) Collin, son of Thomas and Elizabeth (Clayton)

Collin, was baptized in Sheffield, Yorkshire, England, October 19,
1596, and was buried there July 2, 1669. He married, at the Shef-
field Parish Church, November 4, 1622, Marie Bate. Children, bap-
tized at Sheffield: 1. John (1), of whom further. 2. William, bap-
tized January 6, 1626-27. 3. Marie, baptized August 22, 1630,

buried October 11, 1631.

(Ibid.)

III. John ( 1 ) Collin, son of Thomas (2) and Marie (Bate)

Collin, was baptized at Sheffield, Yorkshire, England, July 27, 1623,
and was buried there, June 12, 1703. He married and had children,
baptized at Rotherham: 1. Thomas, baptized October 4, 1654. 2.

John, buried at Rotherham, September 2, 1656. 3. John (2), of

whom further.

(Ibid. Rotherham Parish Registers.)

IV. John (2) Collins, son of John ( 1 ) Collin, was baptized at
Rotherham, September 12, 1659. He later was of Nottingham, where
he was mayor in 1713, and sheriff in 1715. He married and was
the father of: 1. John (3), of whom further.

(Rotherham Parish Registers.)

433

SKINNER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

IV. John (2) Collins, son of John ( 1 ) Collin, was baptized at
Sheffield, March 29, 1690. He was a cutler of Sheffield. He mar-
ried, at the Rotherham Parish Church, May 15, 1721, Anna Rawlin,
of Rotherham. Child: 1. Thomas (3), of whom further.

(Ibid. Sheffield Parish Registers.)

VI. Thomas (3) Collins, son of John (3) and Anna (Rawlin)

Collins, had the following children, baptized at Rotherham: 1.

Thomas, baptized January 17, 1761-62, married, at Rotherham Par-
ish Church, by license dated February 14, 1795, Elizabeth Hirst,
widow. 2. Peter, of whom further. 3. Mary, baptized July 1 1, 1770;
married, at Rotherham Parish Church, May 27, 1816, James Clark
Sewell.

(Rotherham Parish Registers.)

VII. Peter Collins, son of Thomas (3) Collins, was baptized at
Rotherham, September 1, 1765. He married, at Rotherham Parish
Church, January 10, 1816, Anne Mellor. They were the parents of:
1. Catherine, of whom further.

(Ibid.)

VIII. Catherine Collins, daughter of Peter and Anne (Mellor)
Collins, was baptized at Rotherham, June 4, 1818, and died at Win-
chester, Connecticut, March 16, 1856. She married John (3) Skin-
ner. (Skinner VIII.)

(Ibid.)

434

ODDITIES IN AMERICAN HISTORY

THE
FIRST

BABY

Born ON AMERICAN W IS ^OT&HM£
BEEN SNORQO, SON oFIHoQFlNM
KARLESFNI AUD GODRIP, BORN IN /Otyj
GUO RIO VvJPiS Ttl6 WIDOW OF UBlF
ERICSSONS BR0TM£ft,Ti4ORSTeiN .
e humn GevmoHs

OfWOrtfA/ or US.

AMERICANA

OCTOBER, 1939

H enry Ad am s and the Civi 1 W ar

By Charles I. Glicksberg, Ph. D., Newark, New Jersey

ENRY Adams arrived in England on May 13, 1861.
Officially his position was that of private secretary to his
father, the American Minister. Secretly, however, he
had made up his mind to do far more for his country.
If the family would not permit him to enlist, he could at least use his
pen to good advantage. Faithfully he sent letters to the New York
“Times,” interpreting as well as reporting the issues, personalities,
and events that chiefly concerned his countrymen. He discussed and
shrewdly appraised the policy of the Ministry; he gauged the tem-
per of Parliament and the shifting pressure of public opinion; he
stressed the vital importance of keeping the blockade unbroken; he
wrote warningly of the dangers of intervention, the possibility of a
war with England, the crisis that would arise if a European power
actually invaded Mexico; he deplored the criminal mistake made in
seizing Mason and Slidell; he decried the insolent, aggressive tone
of the New York press.

What his purpose and objectives were as a newspaper corre-
spondent we can glean from the letters he sent to his brother, the
only one in whom he confided. On July 2, 1861, he stated that his
letters in the New York “Times” would convey all his views on the
subject of politics. “They are very correctly printed; at least the
three first which are all that have reached me.”1 Most of the Eng-
lish diplomats and statesmen, he points out, were laboring under the

“A Cycle of Adams Letters,” ed. W. C. Ford (Boston and New York, 1920), I, 16.

443

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

illusion that the erring Southern States would eventually be allowed
to depart in peace, and that this in the end would be the best policy.
Yet he believes that the English are really favorably disposed towards
the North. If the Ministry granted belligerent rights to the South,
it was because they worked on the mistaken assumption that the split-
ting up of the Union was inevitable. Henry Adams therefore felt
that it was extremely unwise for Americans to keep on criticizing
England for the blunder she has committed — a blunder she has tried
hard to atone for. Such attacks would certainly not help to advance
the cause of the North, and he resolved to do all he could “to bring
matters straight.”2

The strained diplomatic relations between England and America
— these had to be adjusted first of all. The statesmen at home were
tactless in their remarks, foolishly defiant in their management of
foreign affairs. To the very end Henry Adams maintained that Eng-
land could be kept officially neutral, if not friendly, so long as the
Union army did not suffer a decisive defeat on the battlefield. The
force of public opinion was unmistakably ranged against the Slave
Power. Patience, tact, a spirit of compromise would succeed where
bluster was bound to fail. His letters to the New York “Times”
were a deliberate attempt to pour oil on troubled water, to create the
basis for a friendly understanding between the two countries.

In his first letter he carefully analyzed the attitude of the English
government and the people towards the North. The present Min-
istry was liberal, “but its liberality has no great exponent. Lord
Palmerston is its head, but only because no one else has shown him-
self strong enough to combine the malcontents. There is no homo-
geneity, no warm union at the bottom of it. It is supported on the
one side by the manufacturing interests of the great cities, of which
Mr. Gladstone is one representative, and on the other by the old-
fashioned Liberals of the country and elsewhere, who have formed
the strength of the Anti-Slavery Party in England. The difficulty in
treating the American question is that the Ministry in effectively aid-
ing the North would offend their friends in the commercial interests,
especially those of the “Manchester School,” with Mr. Gladstone at
their head; while in encouraging the South they forfeit the support
of their own wing, to which, in this matter, Mr. Bright belongs.

2. Ibid., I, 17.

444

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

“If our Government forces the evil to a head by resenting the
course the Ministry have taken , it will infallibly create trouble here;
may even make a question on which the Ministry would divide and
break up. They have no deep hold on the people, and no leader of
force and position enough to hold his party together against so rude a
shock, aggravated as it would be by the deep discontent among the
middle and lower classes a (sic) the manner in which they have trifled
with the great questions of reform.”3 There the parties stood divided:
the Manchester people driven by economic interest to aid and protect
the South, while the Liberals with a large following among the
masses sided with the North and forced the hand of the Ministry.

But this political balance of power, Henry Adams shrewdly
observed, made plain the path that the American government should
pursue. If the United States sought causes for a quarrel, it would
not have to look far. There was relief, however, in the thought
that the American Minister “at least means to take no step with-
out due care, for he has had at least one, possibly more than one,
interview with Lord John Russell, and as yet nothing is heard of any
difficulty. Nor is it indeed likely that he would be willing to take the
responsibility of a quarrel with the Government at such a time. The
stroke, if it comes at all, must come from Washington and the Presi-
dent without circumlocution, and our Minister here has only to obey
orders and keep our interests as safe as he can until the time comes
when higher interests demand that they should be thrown aside.”4

In his next communication to the New York “Times,” Henry
Adams describes how the English Ministry circumvented the efforts
of the Southern agents to secure recognition of the Confederacy.
The propaganda of the Southern Commissioners had won the sup-
port of some members of the House of Commons. Nevertheless, the
people as a whole are not in sympathy with the rebellion. “The best
men in England grieve over the misfortune, and would gladly avert
it. Lancashire and Yorkshire are powerful, but principle will over-

3. The New York “Times,” June 7, 1861. The letter that appeared on June 3, 1861,
was apparently not written by Henry Adams, since it mentions that he was in Paris a
short time ago. There is no record that he visited Paris in 1861. For the same reason,
the letter printed on June 17, 1861, by the same writer, has not been assigned to Adams.

4. Ibid. The American Minister, Charles Francis Adams, is frequently referred
to in these letters. The devoted son lost no opportunity to support his father’s policy.
Significant, too, is the journalistic camouflage Henry Adams uses to disguise his source
of information. What he knows at first hand is reported as if it were a rumor.

445

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

balance the mere matter of money-making, and Britain will stand firm
in her opposition to the usurpations of the slaveocracy. And another
important movement will soon be developed, not only here but on the
Continent. England and every other first rate Power in Europe will
before long declare ‘privateering’ and ‘piracy’ synonymous. Let Con-
gress provide for the acceptance of the Treaty of Paris,5 among the
first acts after convening in July, and the penalty that awaits the
‘sea rover’ will follow in the wake of every private cruiser that
steals out of a Southern port.”6 He concludes his letter with patriotic
assurance: “We have great faith in the united strength of Govern-

ment and people, and believe that success will attend every stroke
which the arm of loyalty wields in the defence of law, order and
liberty.”

Henry Adams sought by all means to dispel the notion that pre-
vailed in America that the overthrow of the present English Minis-
try would be a good thing. “Certainly if there is to be a war, it will
be one of the objects that we shall first gain, but if it is our wish, and
it certainly is our interest, to keep England on our side, where she
undoubtedly now stands, then the maintenance of the Liberal Cabinet
ought to be our policy. Theirs is the party that for forty years has
struggled with gradual success but against the most bitter and obstinate
opposition, for the great principles of popular representation, free
trade, and the overthrow of all the shackles that once bound commerce
and National intercourse down — the corn laws, the navigation laws,
and the many other illiberal and antiquated restrictions of all sorts that
once were a source of poverty to themselves and irritation to us and to
the rest of the world. Their statesmen, or at least their ideas, have
been the means of protecting the advance of liberal opinions in
Europe, and through them, more than in any other way, Europe is
being brought into sympathy with those liberal views which may be
called English now, if you like, but which belonged to America before
their day. It is this liberal Cabinet, and the much abused Lord
John Russell himself, who represent much more than any other party,

5. For a discussion by Henry Adams of the Treaty of Paris see his article on the
subject in “Historical Essays” (New York, 1891) and his comments in “A Cycle of
Adams Letters,” I, 40-41.

6. The New York “Times,” June 21, 1861. Two letters by different correspondents
from London appear in this issue. The first, which quotes largely from speeches made
in Parliament, is not by Henry Adams. The second, both in style and tone, is distinctly
recognizable as his.

446

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

certainly infinitely more than that of the Earl of Derby, the popular
or democratic, and the old Whiggish sympathies with free institu-
tions. If America wishes a war with England, France and Spain,
then it is of little consequence what Ministry is to direct it. But if
we truly want peace and sympathy, there is no use in flattering our-
selves in finding it in the Earl of Derby, probably the man of all
others in public affairs who most profoundly dislikes and distrusts
republicanism in every form, nor in Mr. Disraeli, who loves it no
more than his chief. Those are now, as they always must be, our real
allies, who fought the battles of reform and won them in all the

great branches of the constitution and of trade If then we

really mean to remain on good terms with England, the very last
means to do it is to declare hostility to the Liberals and tear down
Lord John Russell to put the Earl of Malmesbury in his place.”7
Nor was there any ground for believing that France would break
her friendship with England if the latter became involved in a war
with the United States. But more serious for the moment than
speculations concerning Napoleon’s probable policy was the news
that a body of English troops was about to depart for Canada. The
movement was associated with a rumor, originating in America, that
the President and the Cabinet were bent on precipitating a foreign
war. Hence the anxious, disturbed state of mind of the English gov-
ernment. “Still it seems strange that the Ministry should take such
a step without very positive reasons, and if it really has them, what
are they and where do they come from? If left alone, every one
here knows that England will begin no war; it’s not her interest nor
the policy of the Government. What can her reason then be for taking,
at such a critical moment, what will evidently be called by everyone a
war step? Nothing definite is known here, that I can discover,
except the one patent fact that this Government is uneasy about Can-
ada. After the course things have taken here in our favor, there
seems no fair reason for this fear, unless it really believes that Mr.
Lincoln means to create a war; and if any such belief as this has
influenced this Government, you in America are more likely to know
the real state of the case and the reasons for the fear, than we on
this side.”8

7. Ibid., June 28, 1861.

8. Ibid., June 28, 1861.

447

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

If any one in England labored zealously to create a friendly state
of public opinion in England, it was the American Minister, and
Henry Adams, whenever the occasion arose, would point with pride
to the example set by his father. Unlike the Southern Commission-
ers who blundered badly in their propagandistic efforts, Charles
Francis Adams knew when to keep silent, when to retire discreetly
behind the scenes and let things take their natural course. The South-
ern Commissioners had left England for France, and to Henry
Adams this was not a retreat but a rout. He crowed exultantly over
their discomfiture. “They have failed in every single object that
they tried for. They wished recognition, and they never were fur-
ther from it than now. They wished agitation, but the House of
Commons swept down on their poor champion, and overwhelmed
him remorselessly. They wished to organize a fleet of privateers, and
the British Government shut their ports in their faces. They wished
to borrow money, and their bonds remain untaken.”9

All signs pointed to a steadily improving state of affairs. If only
the Morrill tariff were reduced, if some reasonable concessions were
made, the lasting friendship of the English people could be secured.
“If we have a great man to direct our country, he will neglect no
opportunity of binding to our side the interests even more than the
mere sympathies of every foreign nation for the present.”10

Like a good reporter, Henry Adams kept his ears open and
tracked every rumor down to its source. He did not believe that
privateers stood a good chance of clearing from an English port.
The American Consul and Charles Francis Adams, who had access
to large sources of information, knew perfectly well what was going
on and could be depended on to act with firmness when the time
called for it. Moreover, the English seamen were strongly Union
in their sympathies and would not consent to handle a cargo that was
of a suspicious character.11

But the Secessionists were resourceful and desperate. If they
couldn’t succeed in one way they would try another, and their next
move would be an attempt to secure supplies by way of Mexico.
That move had to be prevented at all costs. More alarming, how-
ever, was the depression that was settling over England. Once the

9. Ibid., July 4, 1861.

10. Ibid., July 4, 1861.

11. Ibid., July 19, 1861.

448

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

stock of cotton on hand became exhausted, Henry Adams predicted
that an acute financial and industrial crisis would develop. Fortu-
nately, England was too wealthy, possessed too large a reserve fund,
to be easily shaken. “The efforts to obtain cotton from other regions
than from our Cotton States have been great, and will probably be
to a certain point successful; at least a supply may be obtained large
enough to tide over the Winter, and by next Spring a portion of our
cotton will probably find its way over here, even if we are not by that
time in possession of the whole supply. By that time, too, we may
expect a revival of the American trade which will be felt in England.
In short, it seems likely that the shock of our civil war will be con-
siderably softened by the time it reaches these shores, and if so, we
may dismiss all fears of English interference with our blockade,
while England will be only too glad to find herself next year inde-
pendent of our cotton.”12 To offset this optimistic version of affairs,
there was reason to believe that the Ministry, not dominated by a
single will, was disintegrating, and no one could say in advance what
changes would take place. Whatever happened, Henry Adams felt
convinced that the fundamental policy of the English government
towards the North would remain unaffected. It seemed to him that
the credit of the Southern Confederacy was growing less and less
every day. England would not recognize the Secessionists unless
they won the war. “When she does recognize them, if she does it at
all, it will only be in connection with France, and probably with
Spain. She has no idea of doing it alone, for I do not believe that
any Ministry could now stand for a week the schism and danger that
such a recognition, or even the suspicion of such an intention, would
cause here.”13

As he watched the political contest raging in England, the clash
of personalities, Henry Adams concluded that there was but one man
who commanded his undivided respect, a politician who rose impres-
sively about the general level of mediocrity. That man was John
Bright. “Of all the eminent Englishmen — not excepting even his
friend, Mr. Cobden — he is the only one who has stated our problem
perfectly from an English point of view, and who appears to thor-
oughly comprehend the feeling of the Northern States on this mat-

12. Ibid., August 2, 1861.

13. Ibid., August 12, 1861.

449

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

ter. You cannot persuade most Englishmen that we are united and
in earnest. They think that the compromise feeling in the North
will put an end to the war, and let the insurgents go; and they are so
convinced that this must be the result, that they are hardly open to
argument on the matter. “Cui bono?” is their one question. “What
will you do with them after you’ve got them?” Just as though a
man fighting for his life with a maniac would stop because it would
be hard ultimately to hold and cure him after he was bound. Mr.
Bright allows himself to be blinded by no such reasoning. He has
spoken out in Manchester, right in the heart of the district which is
worst inclined towards the Union; and he has told the cotton mer-
chants that their only chance for cotton rests in the speedy and com-
plete triumph of the North. He has told them, too, that interference
with our blockade means war with America; a fact which it is right
that they should fully appreciate.”14

Then came the most staggering news of all : the Union army had
been shamefully defeated at the battle of Bull Run. Henry Adams
instantly perceived that this news was bound to have a bad effect on
European nations, particularly on England. The English govern-
ment would not, of course, hurriedly adopt a new policy. “Of recog-
nition of the insurgents there seems no present danger, but it is not so
certain that this check will not encourage the cotton interest to make
an effort to set aside our blockade. After all, the action of England
will depend on events. You on the other side of the water, will be
able to predict it before we can, according as the war progresses well
or otherwise. As yet, however, no one knows of any intention of this
Government to interfere with the blockade. It is certain or as near
certain as anything can be, that the British fleets are ordered to
respect it faithfully and without cavil or quibble, any statement to
the contrary notwithstanding, and if the time shall come when this
rule will be broken through, the British Government will do it with
its eyes open as to the consequences, and will hardly venture on the
step without the assistance of France.”15

14. Ibid., August 15, 1861.

15. Ibid., August 24, 1861. In this letter Henry Adams speaks of the consternation,
“the sense of shame and mortification,” with which the news of defeat was received by
Northerners in England. For his personal reaction to the news of the battle of Bull Run,
see “A Cycle of Adams Letters,” I, 24-27; “The Education of Henry Adams” (Boston
and New York, 1918), p. 118.

450

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

Still, whatever desperate expedients the Southerners might resort
to in their efforts to secure allies abroad, their tactics were doomed
to failure if the blockade was strictly maintained. The history of the
next two months would decide whether England would attempt to
break the blockade. Roused to an awareness of the danger, Henry
Adams, in an eloquent passage, exhorted his countrymen to view the
situation realistically :

“You at home have your ears deafened and your eyes dazzled by
the noise and parade of the armies, and you expect them to solve this
question. We here see the struggle in a different light. It is of small
consequence to our minds whether our armies advance or not, so long
as they only maintain their ground. But it is of a vast consequence
to us whether the blockade is so rigidly enforced as to exclude a pos-
sibility of England’s declaring it ineffective. She will do so if we
give her the chance. Of that we should be foolhardy to doubt; and
if she does it we shall have sooner or later to give in.

“If we can reach the new year in safety, we shall have won the
game. With the destruction of her great cotton monopoly, the
Gordian knot is cut, and we may trust to our Armies and the slaves
to do the rest. But we, in England, feel that it all rests there on that
one point of the blockade. It must be effective, whatever our Armies
are, or we may as well give up the fight. England is not to be trusted.
She will get her cotton if we give her the shadow of an excuse.”16

Contrary to expectations, the price of cotton did not rise in the
market, although the supply was supposed to be near the point of
exhaustion. How account for this economic paradox? Henry Adams
explained it on the ground that the manufacturers felt confident the
government would break down the blockade if conditions became
intolerable. The whole issue, however, still remained in doubt.
“What England means to do, England herself as yet does not know.
It may be that events will take such a course as to make her interfer-
ence with our blockade imminent. If so, we shall have no doubt suf-
ficient warning of it, and then we have still our last and highest card,
which will make the people of this country cry ‘Hands off,’ to any
Ministry that offers to interfere; we must proclaim emancipation and
place the struggle in its true light before the world. At that cry all

16. Ibid., September 14, 1861.

451

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

the nations of Europe will form a ring round us till the struggle is
decided. Even cotton and the dread of famine will be powerless
against the popular force of that word, and the people of England
who refuse now to see in our contest anything more than a dispute
about a tariff, will then at last end their foolish comments and wait
in patience the end of the battle.”17

Discouraging, indeed, were the effects of the defeat suffered at
Bull Run. Another defeat might drive the British government to
the step of granting recognition to the Southern Confederacy, but so
far it had scrupulously adhered to its neutrality policy. But recogni-
tion and the maintenance of the blockade were two different matters.
To interfere with the blockade was tantamount to a declaration of
war, and the Ministry would not venture to go that far. In the
meantime, storm clouds hovered over Mexico; armed intervention
was being planned by the European powers. Exactly what England,
France and Spain intended to do no one could say as yet, but an inva-
sion of some kind was imminent.18

To make matters worse, the Northern statesmen and diplomats
were lacking in adroitness and the elementary rules of diplomatic
usage. Henry Adams complains bitterly: “Some one in our Gov-

ernment seems to want manners. This is not the first time that the
complaint of rudeness has been made, and there is nothing so likely
to prejudice foreign Governments against us as want of courtesy
toward their representatives. I do not know where the impression
came from, but I do know that there is a universal impression here
that the American Government, to whatever party it belongs, is and
remains under-bred. It works badly against us here. One such exhibi-
tion, for instance, as that of Mr. Clay, at Paris, does us almost as
much harm among the governing classes as Bull Run itself. Now the
English have an idea that Mr. Clay’s rudeness and indiscretion are
merely a type of the accepted code at Washington. They firmly
believe that Mr. Seward calls Lord Lyons all the abusive epithets he
can imagine every time they meet, and finishes every conversation by
pointed allusions to Bunker’s Hill and Saratoga, and the necessity for
‘licking the Britishers again before they’ll behave themselves;’ and
they believe no less firmly that Lord Lyons bears all these insults as

1 7. Ibid.

18. Ibid., September 26, 1861.

452

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

a well-bred man must, when he cannot escape from them. We have,
in short, the reputation of being an ill-mannered people, and fond of
insulting our neighbors. Is it really sd, or is our Government
belied?”19

In practically every letter that Henry Adams contributed to the
New York “Times,” the possibilities of interference with the block-
ade were anxiously weighed and considered. So much depended on
how this issue was decided that it became almost an obsession with
him. Both the English and French governments would respect the
blockade so long as it was vigilantly maintained. The truth seems
to be, he argued, “that the policy of Great Britain toward the
United States has been shaky all along. The Ministry themselves
were divided upon it. So far as non-intervention went, they were
all tolerably well agreed, but when it came to the minutiae of non-
intervention, there was a difference of opinion. One party sided with
the South; another stood up for the North. Exactly who the North-
erners and Southerners are seems to be a matter of some doubt.
Lord Russell, at all events, is with us So long as Lord Rus-

sell is at the head of Foreign Affairs, I believe America may feel
confident that no encouragement will be given to the Slave power.”20

By this time, Henry Adams began to fear that his identity as a
newspaper correspondent would soon be discovered, and he resolved
to throw some dust in the eyes of those who suspected him. “I don’t
know whether my last letters will appear or not, but if they do you
can form some judgment as to my inventive powers. The truth is
that I’ve lately told so much in that way which was not generally
known, that my position began to be too hot and I thought I’d try a
little wrong scent. The facts are all invented therefore, but the idea
is carried out as faithfully as I could, of quoting the state of Eng-
lish opinion.”21 His inventive powers are effectively used in the let-
ter that appeared in the New York “Times” on October 13, 1861.
It describes a visit he paid to Oxford, the ruins of Kenilworth, and

19. Ibid., September 26, 1861.

20. Ibid., October 8, 1861. This interpretation of Lord Russell’s attitude towards the

North stands in ironic contrast to the portrait of the man that is given in “The Educa-
tion of Henry Adams” : “Every act of Russell, from April, 1861, to November, 1862,

showed the clearest determination to break up the Union. The only point in Russell’s
character about which the student thought no doubt to be possible was its want of good
faith.” (P. 163.)

21. “A Cycle of Adams Letters,” I, 50-51.

453

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

Warwick Castle, though it also discusses the prevailing state of opin-
ion among Englishmen. In the next letter, he pretends that he has
passed a week in Scotland and records his impressions: “Every-

where I have been met with bitter complaints of the state of the
country. Industry is said to be coming to a stand-still. The factories
of Sheffield are no longer a support, but a weight to the country. The
looms of Manchester furnish already only a meager support to the
swarms of their dependents, and are likely, before long, to furnish
none at all. The cry of famine has already made itself heard in
Ireland, and is echoed at Paris. People do not dare to estimate the
number of laborers who will, within three months, be thrown wholly
out of employ; for there is hardly a branch of industry that has
not suffered, and there is hardly a person in the three kingdoms
who is not seeking to retrench his expenses as much as he can.
Nor do I believe the alarm to be unreasonable. If it were cot-
ton alone that was wanted, the danger would not be so great;
but the American troubles and last year’s bad harvest have blighted
every kind of industry here, and if cotton in any quantity were to
come to-day, the evil and the danger would be hardly diminished.
England might get on without great difficulty if it were merely Ameri-
can produce that she wanted; but to have the American market
closed to her own industry also, is beginning to shake her to her very
center.”22

Apathetic in their misery, the English masses were now actively
longing and praying for peace. They wished to see the end of the
conflict, no matter which side was the victor. The attitude of the
English government, however, was visibly improving. A spirit of
cordiality between the countries was growing. Some understanding
regarding the Mexican affair must have been arranged between
Seward and Lord Russell. Had not the American Ambassador
passed a week in Scotland as the guest of Lord Russell?23 “The
very fact that this had been done and had not got into the papers,
seemed to me to show a secrecy, or at least a privacy, that meant some-

22. The New York “Times,” October 28, 1861.

23. Henry Adams probably derived most of his information regarding conditions in
Scotland from his father. Charles Francis Adams returned from his visit to Lord Rus-
sell on September 27, 1861. Henry Adams believed that the visit would have an excellent
effect in cementing friendly relations between the two governments. “Lord Russell has
explained the Mexican business very satisfactorily, and it appears that England is trying
to check Spain, not to help her.” (“A Cycle of Adams Letters,” I, 48.)

454

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

thing. At any rate the fact is very certain, and if it has no rela-
tion to Mexico and Spain, then it has relation to some other business
between the two Governments, and proves that their differences, if
any, are in a fair way to settlement. People agree wonderfully when
they accept each other’s hospitality, and a good dinner and a bottle
of sherry — very, very old — are more likely to bring a matter of busi-
ness out straight than all the arguing on paper in the world.”24 Henry
Adams was so overjoyed at the favorable turn events had taken that
he urged his readers to throw up their caps for “Johnny Russell.”
His satisfaction at this happy state of affairs was but short-lived.
News came that the steamer “Bermuda” had successfully run the
blockade with a cargo of arms and ammunition. The Secessionists
immediately seized on this incident as proof that the blockade was
ineffective. Such a success was as good as ten thousand lives to them.
Why was the Northern fleet caught napping? Then there was
authentic news of another steamer, loaded to capacity with muni-
tions of every sort, that was leaving the Clyde, nominally for the
west coast of Africa, but actually for America. “These things trou-
ble us loyalists here excessively, for every cartridge on board of this
vessel may be the life of some of our friends or relations; every
pound of powder represents a terrible loss to our side; every rag
of clothing represents so much longer continuance of this war.”25
How long could this go on ? Loopholes in the blockade would be
sure to increase the pressure on the Ministry to declare the blockade
ineffective. The opponents of the blockade in England have become
suddenly courageous, outspoken, and extraordinarily active. “Steadily
and surely popular opinion is forming here against us ; our allies are
becoming silent, and our enemies more bitter. That this will lead
to actual steps against us may not be true, but that it will encourage
the Southern party here to make a strong effort against us, is certain,
and for that effort the party is organizing rapidly. I have been as
slow as any one to foresee difficulty or to croak, but we might as well
look the danger in the face and be ready for it, since, supposing the
present state of doubt to last till New-Year’s Day, and the other side
to gain strength in the same ratio as during the last three months, we

24. The New York “Times,” October 28, 1861.

25. Ibid., November 2, 1861.

455

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

have nothing good to look for in England or in Europe. Till that
time, however, we are reasonably safe unless some great disaster
occurs.”26 By all means, let General McClellan take three months
to complete his military arrangements, but it was essential that no
serious disaster should occur. “It is of very little consequence what
way public opinion inclines here, provided that we carry the day in
the end, and as I have said, the English Government is not likely to
move for some time yet. So we shall continue to bear the slings and
arrows of outrageous fortune, hoping only that some day some news
will come to set our country up again.”27

Henry Adams had by this time become convinced that there was
no point in trying to correct and conciliate British notions concerning
the United States. A ridiculous rumor gained wide currency in Eng-
land that Garibaldi had been offered, and ha^d refused, the position
of commander-in-chief of the Northern armies. Why trouble to con-
tradict such silly stories? “Why care at all what the English think
or believe? They despise us for our sensitiveness, and are only
encouraged to advance still greater absurdities. Until we can learn
to cut ourselves loose from all dependence on others, we are not fit
to obtain success. Sympathy in England or elsewhere is to be won
by the sword alone. Fear is the only bond by which a republic can
hold Europe to it.”28

All evidence, however, pointed to the fact that the British gov-
ernment had no thought of violating the blockade. Equally encour-
aging was the statement, altogether favorable to the North, made
by the Duke of Argyle, a prominent member of the Cabinet. Nor
would the plan of the Secessionist party in England to stir up the
operatives of Manchester and the suffering poor of London and
Liverpool to agitate for interference with the blockade ever suc-
ceed. Indeed, the best way of blocking it would be to support the
present Ministry, “which has pledged itself to respect our blockade,
and to remain neutral in our struggles. All irritating language ought
to be avoided, and all causes of quarrel removed. It may be a ques-
tion of life and death to us, and we who are here feel its importance,
perhaps, more than you at home.”29

26. Ibid., November 7, 1861.

27. Ibid.

28. Ibid.

29. Ibid., November 18, 1861.

456

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

In his letter of November 30, 1861, Henry Adams comments on
the rumor that the “James Adger” was waiting to capture Mason
and Slidell and carry them to New York. This rumor, he argued,
was without foundation, since the real object of the captain of the
“James Adger ” was not that. Then came the dinner of the Lord
Mayor of London, testifying to the increasing friendliness of the two
governments. “For reasons that have been from time to time men-
tioned in my letters, I had believed and declared that this better state
of feeling and firmer confidence had begun to exist between the two
Cabinets, and I am now the more certain that this must be the case
from the fact of Mr. Adams having at last broken his long silence,
and, satisfied probably that he possessed the confidence of the British
Government, having made his first diplomatic effort towards gain-
ing that of the British people. The spot he chose on which to com-
mence operations is the City of London — the heart of the English
commerce, the very centre of the English political system. If that
can be favorably impressed, the step is a long one, and the advantage
great. From what I see and hear, I should think that the attempt
was successful. Nothing could have been handsomer than the remarks
of the Lord Mayor, the host, be it remembered, on calling him out,
and his answer to these cordial words was calculated to do that with-
out which all diplomacy is of small use, to impress his audience and
the people at large with confidence and good-will towards him per-
sonally. The task of a Minister in this country now is no easy one,
for there is an amount of ill-feeling which has gradually risen on both
sides of the Atlantic, that must perpetually destroy all the effect of
conciliatory efforts and paralyze all the nerves of diplomacy. Never-
theless, in the present case, some impression seems to have been
made. The Press has almost unanimously received Mr. Adams’
speech in the same spirit in which it was made, and from men of all
classes I hear the same expression of gratification that the hostile
tendencies of the two nations should have received an authoritative
check.”30 The outlook on the problem of neutrality was now heart-
ening. With men like Charles Francis Adams on the scene, the
friendship of England could be cultivated and kept.

30. Ibid., November 30, 1861.

457

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

III

Then came news of the capture of Mason and Slidell and the
insult to the British flag, and everything else was temporarily forgot-
ten in the prevailing excitement. “It may well be imagined with what
savage exultation this violent step was received by all those who were
smarting under the insults which our flag was now receiving in Eng-
land,31 and how glad the Americans were to repay, for once, at any
cost, the heavy debt under which they lay.

“On that point, at least, we may rest calm and contented. Beyond
a doubt the debt has been paid off, with all its arrears of interest,
and we have had the satisfaction of seeing the English suffer under
as great a load of bitterness as any under which we have groaned.
Never for many years has any event created such an excitement here
as this. On ’Change people seemed bewildered; they could not
believe what they read, and would not make up their minds, for a
time, what to think. Then Consols began to fall steadily, and their
fall was only checked toward evening by a great firm who sent out
and bought up a rate sufficient to sustain the market. Railroad securi-
ties fell alarmingly. The universal cry was war and retaliatory
measures of the most stringent kind were discussed, among which not
the least popular was the sending Mr. Adams his passport at once.
A few cool men still maintained their self-control, and discouraged all
such talk, but all that evening the war fever raged with great vio-
lence, and universal confusion and panic prevailed.”32

In his autobiography, Henry Adams has described his first reac-
tion of tumultuous delight on receiving the news that Mason and
Slidell had been captured, but the war-inflamed temper of the news-
papers and the populace brought him back to his senses. The threat
of war was at last staring the North in the face; the future looked
black. All things considered the action of Captain Wilkes was to be
regretted. He had done more than was strictly necessary. “Six
months more would have decided our civil war, and then if we liked,
we might have taken Great Britain in hand, but as our affairs now
stand, a foreign war was neither necessary nor expedient. This Gov-

31. Refers to the “Nashville” case and the refusal of the English Government to see
that common justice was done.

32. Ibid,., December 19, 1861.

458

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

ernment did not want to have a war, nor would it accept one now,
except that it knows that popular opinion demands it, and in the
present excited state of the public mind, strong measures are neces-
sary. Our technical right to seize the men may be perfect, and the
decision of the Crown lawyers in saying that if we had insulted them
more they would have had nothing to say, may be a mere quibble, but
it does not change the fact that to use our right was, as matters stood,
a blunder if not a crime.

“On the other hand there is still one measure that may save us,
or at least weaken very much the force of the war party here. In a
position of affairs like the present, it would be the worst of folly not
to seize every weapon, no matter how savage ; not to strike with our
whole force on every point, no matter at what cost, that still remains
open to attack. If our Government hopes to maintain itself, it must
now act with all the vigor or all the violence that can he used. The
slaves, wherever we can get at them, must be freed and armed. Such
a measure would still have great effect here, notwithstanding the
bitterness of feeling against the North, for no Englishman would
like to appear as the upholder of the slave system, and it would give
our friends courage to come out again in opposition to the war policy.
This is the one means of escape that it (sic) still open to us, and if
the blunders we have committed shall lead to that result, Providence
may yet bring us through the trial.”33

The spirit of hostility persisted strongly for another two weeks.
The streets echoed with threats and insults. Theatre audiences vio-
lently applauded every warlike allusion to the Trent affair. “At
Evans’, crowded rooms cheer every night a new song which tells
how the Yankees are to be used up, and how Britannia is to rule for-
ever, and the pint-pots suffer severe injuries from the energy with
which they are pounded on the tables. There is no sign of slacken-
ing energy at the arsenals and dockyards. Troops are being concen-
trated; all available steamers are being taken up for transport serv-
ice; immense supplies and stores are being shipped; vessels-of-war
are fitting out as fast as means will allow; business is at a stand-still,
at least on the Stock Exchange, and business men are fluttering about,
grasping at every straw which seems to show in what direction the

33- Ibid.

459

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

current will finally turn.”34 In spite of all this apparent hostility,
Henry Adams felt confident that war would not break out. There
was one important factor which was likely to turn the scales in favor
of the North. Queen Victoria was earnestly endeavoring to prevent
war. Should the United States, however, refuse to surrender the
prisoners, then England would have no recourse but to declare war.
Instead of plunging in recklessly, she acted with due caution in order
to place America completely in the wrong. And America would be
unquestionably in the wrong “if she falsifies her glorious record, and
tramples on the laurels of the fathers, by justifying the retention of
these men.”35 England would then proceed to play with the North
as a cat does with a mouse. She would acknowledge the Southern
Confederacy, and thus shatter all hopes of restoring the Union. Next
she would go ahead and raise the blockade. Then if the United
States, in self-defense, declared war, England would accept it as a
matter of necessity.

The diplomatic crisis did not go that far. Affairs improved rap-
idly when Charles Francis Adams, in an interview with Lord Palmer-
ston, officially announced that Captain Wilkes had acted without
authorization and that the United States was still open to any
proposition. This brought about a return of public confidence.
“However active the pure war party may be, and however unscrupu-
lous, its only means of gaining its ends are now as formerly our own
blunders. The mistakes that Capt. Wilkes committed has almost
given them the control of the nation — did, in fact, for the first few
days put the whole national policy in their hands. This, however, is
now passed. It is no longer true that a majority of the nation wishes
war, and it is no longer doubted that a majority of the Ministry are
willing to do all they can, short of abandoning Mason and Slidell to
their fate, to preserve peace.”36

The last letter by Henry Adams points to the gratifying fact
that the war passions were dying out. Hope had begun to spring up
again. The erroneous belief that the United States wanted a foreign
war had been destroyed. Even Lord Palmerston, it was reported,
had declared there would be no war. The London press, including

34. Ibid., December 30, 1861.
35- Ibid.

36. Ibid., January 4, 1862.

460

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

the “Times,” was less belligerent in its utterances. But the South-
erners in England were still undaunted by the new developments.
“In a month, they say, the blockade will be raised; their Confederacy
will be acknowledged; British capital will do all their work; the
days of labor and peril are over, and those of fruition are at hand.
The ‘Nashville’ still lies at Southampton, and the Confederates say
that they have no intention of trying to evade the neutrality by arm-
ing her. The Government has forbidden it, and they are willing to
wait. Much surprise is expressed that no National vessel has been
sent over to look after the ‘Nashville,’ and much anxiety lest she
should run out suddenly and escape after all. There are rumors,
too, of other privateers fitting out, but little has been said of them
since the ‘Trent’ affair, and probably nothing will really be done
about them till that is decided. The Slidell family has retreated, or
advanced, to Paris, where they will probably do us all the harm they
can, which, thanks to our imitation of English manners, is no little.
Mr. Yancey is probably drafting a treaty of alliance, offensive and
defensive, with the English people, to be presented for consideration
to Earl Russell on the first formal reception of the Confederate Com-
missioners. It is all that is now wanting to make his desperate mis-
sion here a complete success.”37

This is not the end of the story. Though Henry Adams ceased
to meddle for the time being with newspaper correspondence, he
watched the ebb and flow of the diplomatic struggle with undimin-
ished interest. His views on the later issues of the Civil War can be
studied in his letters and in his autobiography, but the articles he sent
to the New York “Times” help to round out the picture of the war
in 1 86 1 as it affected a sensitive and intensely patriotic young man.
His interpretation of events reveals not only good judgment but also
admirable self-restraint. Whatever he may have felt at heart, he
did not allow his feelings to distort his vision. He was afraid of the
consequences of a war with England, and spent all his energies and

37- Ibid,., January n, 1862. After this, the New York “Times” printed no letters
from London until February 1, 1862, and this letter bore the signature “Monadnoek.”
Henry Adams’ anonymity had been accidentally disclosed, and he prudently ran to cover.
He stopped his contributions to the New York “Times.” For his lively account of the
whole affair, see “The Education of Henry Adams,” pp. 120-21.

461

HENRY ADAMS AND THE CIVIL WAR

arguments in trying to prevent it. As far as he could gather, Eng-
land intended to maintain her policy of neutrality. The influence of
King Cotton did not prevail, but not for the reason that Henry
Adams gave. He believed that England played the game of non-
intervention because she was swayed by idealistic considerations.
The Union stood forth as a symbol of democracy and freedom. The
sympathies of the masses, particularly of the Lancashire population,
were overwhelmingly with the North. To be sure, Henry Adams
stresses time and again the importance of economic interests, but he
fails to carry his argument to a logical conclusion. The idealistic
explanation of England’s policy of neutrality is no longer accepted
by modern historians.38 The effect of the speeches made by reformers
like Bright have been unduly exaggerated. Nor did the laborers of
Lancashire carry much political weight. England did not intervene
because it was to her interest not to do so. She was making huge
profits from both contestants. Henry Adams, however, was writing
as a journalist and not as an historian. His articles possess an imme-
diacy of feeling and observation that no sober historical account,
based on documentary research, as a rule attains. They enrich our
knowledge of a dramatically exciting chapter of Henry Adams’ life.

38. See Frank Lawrence Owsley, King Cotton Diplomacy (Chicago, 1931), p. 565.

462

John Howard Payne (1791-1852)

By Allan Ross MacDougall,* New York City

j|T is one of life’s little ironies that men who feverishly labor
in life doing one thing are often remembered after death
for another. Samuel Pepys, the punctilious and efficient
Secretary of the Admiralty, is known today chiefly for his
extremely personal “Diary” which he had thought to keep from pry-
ing eyes by the invention and use of a system of shorthand. Sand-
wich, the noble courtier, goes down through the ages as a name for
two slices of bread with something edible between them; the French
minister, Nesselrode, is now — outside the stuffy confines of historical
works — merely a designation for a pudding. Fame, the capricious
wench, has her own ideas of the men and events worthy of being set
down in her golden book.

During his life John Howard Payne, native New Yorker, was a
man famous on two continents as an actor and dramatist. Today,
about ninety years after his death, his name is remembered, if at all,
for one simple song — a very incidental part of one of his sixty dra-
matic works. The irony here is heightened by the fact that, follow-
ing the course of all verses and distichs taken to the public heart,
Payne’s “Home, Sweet Home” often takes on the quality of a folk
song, author unknown. With each succeeding generation that sings
it the song gains new vitality while its author fades into obscurity to
join the vast army of now anonymous poets whose ballads have
become the common coin of our literary heritage.

One passion seems to have ravaged Payne during the first half of
his life — the theatre in all its manifestations. He served this gaudy
mistress as critic, actor, manager, writer. Nothing ever discouraged
him; neither parental displeasure, poverty, prison, nor passing favor.
From his earliest years he devoted himself to this passion and his
place in the history of the English and American theatre is definite if
not brilliant.

*Of the staff of the WPA Federal Writers Project in New York City.

463

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

Like Homer of old, Payne has the honor of having his birthplace
claimed by more than one town. It is said he was born in Boston, in
Easthampton, in New York City. Although the first was carved on
Payne’s gravestone in Tunis, it may be dismissed as a mistake. East-
hampton is more serious as a contender for the honor, for there today
the tourist may visit a charming house known as John Howard
Payne’s Home, Sweet Home. It is furnished in the Colonial manner
with knick-knacks which the eyes of the poet never beheld; beds his
body never lay upon; carpets his feet never trod. It is a permanent
example of that terrible desire inherent in many Americans to create
romantic traditions where none exist. Another ludicrous example of
this is the “Old Kentucky Home” of Stephen Foster in a place where
the songwriter never lived and which contains a tourist-revered piano
which his fingers never as much as strayed over.

Beyond the tourist-attraction house in Easthampton and its own-
ers’ say-so, there is no convincing record that Payne was born in the
little Long Island country town. And one of his grand nephews has
written in this connection: “Tradition has woven a great deal of

romance about the cottage but it seems to rest on a very feeble
hypothesis. There are no records to show that Payne ever lived in
the house.”

We may take it for granted, then, that Payne was born June 9,
1791 — according to his own written statements and those of men who
knew him — in lower Manhattan, near the junction of Pearl and
Broad streets. His father was a schoolmaster, a descendant of early
settlers in Massachusetts; his mother, Sarah Isaacs, the daughter of
a converted Jew, who was an Easthampton merchant and much
esteemed by his neighbors.

When the boy was five he began his series of peregrinations; the
family moved to Boston. During the rest of his life he was never
permanently settled in one place. This thespian vagabond who later
hymned with such heart-touching simplicity the thought that “There’s
no place like home,” never had a real home of his own.

While living in Boston Payne saw his first stage play at the Fed-
eral Street Theatre ; it was there also that his father unwittingly fed
his passion for the stage by giving him elocution lessons. In Boston,
too, he made friends with Samuel Woodworth, the future dramatist

464

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

and author of “The Old Oaken Bucket.” At that period young John
Howard seems to have been an imaginative youth of not too robust
health and a quick and fiery temper. He wrote poems with a certain
facility, if no great show of genius, and to his father’s expressed
annoyance showed more interest in the theatre and the works of the
English dramatists than was considered becoming in one so young.

A turn in the family fortunes sent the delicate youth down to New
York to work as a clerk in the mercantile house of Grant and Forbes.
He was not yet fourteen and was stirred by the lively social and thea-
trical goings-on in the bustling metropolis. Before long he was edit-
ing a paper in his spare time. He called it “The Thespian Mirror”
— a sort of early nineteenth century “Variety” — and wrote in his first
number that it was “to promote the interests of the American Drama
and eradicate false impressions respecting the nature, objects, design,

and tendency of theatrical amusement ”

The fourteen numbers of “The Thespian Mirror” which Payne
edited, published, and presumably sold, brought the precocious youth
many friends and admirers. Among them was a gentleman who
decided that the adolescent editor was worthy of better things than
sitting in playhouses and writing verbose criticisms of the vulgar
mummers’ performances. This Mr. Seaman packed Payne off to be
educated at Union College, Schenectady. Princeton had been first
thought of, but Seaman felt that it was situated too near “seducing
charms and baleful vices.” But whether Princeton or Union mattered
little; Payne was predestined for the theatre and the writer’s desk.
While at Union he edited another paper which he called “The Pas-
time”; he appeared in a student comedy “Pulaski,” playing the female
role of Ladoiska; and as his bohemian-thespian characteristics began
to sprout, the president of the college was forced to say: “His vanity
has led him to make himself conspicuous every where but at college.”
The following year he had a chance to make himself even more
conspicuous and at the same time earn a substantial sum — a sum suf-
ficient to wipe out the debts of the father who formerly looked with
such Puritan severity on his son’s dalliance with playhouse matters.
On February 24, 1809, young Howard Payne, “the American Ros-
cius,” made his debut in the role of Young Norval in the tragedy
“Douglas” at the Old Park Theatre in New York City. He made
a hit, for he was a very personable lad and he spoke the blank verse

465

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

with youthful fire and smooth diction. “His eyes,” said one critic,
“glowed with animation and intelligence.” And further: “A more

extraordinary mixture of softness and intelligence were never asso-
ciated in a human countenance and his face was a true index of
his heart.” As to his acting it seems to have been of the kind that is
usually associated with amateur elocutionists. Said the critic of the
Philadelphia “Mirror of Taste” after Payne had played in that city
in 1810: “When he repeated the words:

‘Of the deep column and the lengthened line,

The Square, the crescent, and the Phalanx firm ’

Master Payne cut those figures and described the square and crescent
with his hands — a great error!” It was the sort of acting which,
underscoring each word and phrase with elaborate dumb-show, is
today sometimes used in vaudeville to make the groundlings guffaw.

For three years “Master” Payne travelled about the civilized
parts of the eastern seaboard states playing with lessening success the
leading roles in the tragic plays of Shakespeare, Voltaire, Kotzebue
and others whose plays were then in vogue. He acted Hamlet and
Romeo, for instance, to the Ophelia and Juliet of Mrs. Poe — the
mother of Edgar Allen — and he appeared in support of the distin-
guished visiting actor, Cooke. During these first years in the theatre
— as indeed all through his life — he had his ups and downs ....
the destined lot of all true bohemians; of all strolling players and
vagabond thespians. To his brother Robert, he wrote once: “I

have been wandering from one end of the theatrical hemisphere
to the other, with various success. Sometimes I found my pockets so
full of money that they would burst, and then again my funds would
sink so low that I could not scrape together enough to pay for sewing
up the rents which my affluence had created.” It was during one of
these periods when his funds had touched bottom that he wrote to
John Jacob Astor. The letter is dated January 23, 18 11, and asks
despairingly for a $1,500 loan. It goes on to tell that when Payne
first went on the stage he assumed all his father’s debts — $3,000, fur-
nished a house and took upon himself all the family concerns. In
less than two years, he went on, he earned $13,000, which were all
devoted to expenses and old debts. Mr. Astor was not moved by
Payne’s written appeal; it might have been more successful had the
borrower made a personal appearance and used his histrionic talents.

466

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

The following year the elder Payne died and since the mother was
already dead five years, young John Howard felt free to follow a
course which had been in his mind for some time. As an actor, as an
aspiring dramatist, his eyes had been turned towards Europe as
towards the theatrical mecca. Was not the great Talma, Bonaparte’s
friend, stirring the elite at the Comedie Francaise in Paris? Was not
London the musical and theatrical center of the English-speaking
world? The oratorios of Handel and Haydn were being performed
by huge choirs. Mrs. Siddons, the queen of tragedy and comedy, was
still majestically treading the boards, as were Mrs. Davenport, Mrs.
Litchfield, and other impressive female figures, while Kemble and
Kean were male idols of the beaux and belles of Drury Lane and
Covent Garden. Grimaldi, the extraordinary clown, was making
Drury Lane’s rafters ring with unrestrained laughter. There was
also an infant prodigy whose fame had been wafted across the wide
Atlantic — one “Master Betty, the young Roscius.” Payne had often
been likened and compared to this midget mimic who played most of
the roles in his repertory.

Rich with $2,000 raised by some generous gentlemen in Balti-
more, Payne sailed for Europe in January, 1813. His pathway when
he landed in Liverpool in February led him straight to jail as a pris-
oner of war. Two weeks later, however, he was released and
descended on London to show them that Master Betty was not the
only young man who could declaim fustian and strike tragic attitudes.
During the first weeks in the metropolis he was aided by Henry
Brevoort, Sir Walter Scott’s Knickerbocker friend, by Washington
Irving’s brother, and by Benjamin West. In June he was ready to
make his first appearance before a London audience. Young Norval
was the part he chose for his debut and while he did not set fire to the
sluggish Thames he did achieve a measure of success. After the Lon-
don season he continued playing the score of roles in his repertory
with various second-string leading ladies through the provinces and
even in Ireland.

With manhood, however, came a certain physical heaviness that
did not sit well upon the not overly tall young actor. Writing back
from London, he once spoke of the struggle he had to keep afloat
after he grew too portly for the stage and began to fatten on trouble

467

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

and starvation. Tragedians who are stout and fat and scant of breath
are not much sought after in any theatre romantic. And so it was
that he left off acting and moved over to Paris in the year 1815.
The French capital was then passing through the hectic period of the
Hundred Days of Napoleon. There was excitement along the boule-
vards; there was a lively gaiety in the crowded cafes and salons; the
theatres were all filled.

Payne’s fame as a successful American actor who had played to
large houses in London having preceded him, he was well received by
his French confreres. The great Talma was especially gracious to
the young Colonial. Through his influence Payne was given the free-
dom of the Comedie Frangaise. He frequented its foyer des artistes
and attended the other theatres and opera houses of the capital; met
the actors and writers in the coffee houses in vogue; and perfected
his knowledge of the language which was later to stand him in such
good stead in the matter of innumerable translations and adaptations
made to keep his pot boiling.

The first of this long series of works from the French was a trans-
lation of a comedy “La Pie Volante.” Under the title “The Maid
and the Magpie,” Payne sold his translation to the manager of the
Covent Garden Theatre for £150. (The play also amused Rossini;
from the Italian version he made a comic opera whose overture is still
often played.) Following the “Magpie,” Payne wrote his most suc-
cessful tragedy, “Brutus, or The Fall of Tarquin.” It can be assumed
that he got the idea for this during his frequent visits to the Comedie
Frangaise, where Voltaire’s tragedy was part of the regular repertory.
Payne’s play, however, is neither a translation nor an adaptation of
the French master’s tragedy. There were seven plays written between
1681 and 1813 on the subject of the noble Roman and Payne stated
quite frankly in his preface that he had used them all for his purpose.
He lifted lines and situations from all the versions and welded the
whole into an acceptable tragedy that had vitality enough to hold
English and American audiences enthralled. After its first perform-
ance on December 3, 1818, at Drury Lane it was played fifty times
during the season and restored the fallen fortunes of the actor-
manager Kean. He later triumphed in the role in Paris. In America,
down to the end of the nineteenth century, it was a favorite stalking

468

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

horse for all the famous tragedians: Junius Brutus Booth, the elder
Wallack, Edwin Forrest, John McCullough, and Edwin Booth all
essayed the fat role of the Roman patriot. Payne’s income from the
play was £183. No royalties ever came to him from any of the
performances in America, where it held the stage for over seventy
years.

As a playwright Payne would be set down today as a “play doc-
tor.” His translations from the French were really adaptations,
often with felicitous additions. Unlike his friend Washington Irv-
ing, with whom he later collaborated on several successful dramatic
works adapted from the French, Payne was not a creative writer.
He did have, however, an innate sense of the theatre which enabled
him to take the French originals, cut all extraneous matter and Gallic
verbosity and set them down on the English stage with their dramatic
or comic vitality unimpaired.

Shortly after the success of “Brutus,” Payne decided to essay the
role of actor-manager-dramatist. He leased the well-known summer
theatre at Sadler’s Wells, quite a distance from the center of London.
But the venture soon proved a disastrous failure. Payne, having
gone blindly into it without any previous managerial experience or
any apparent commercial ability, found himself saddled with enormous
liabilities. The debt load finally brought him low and forced him into
the ignominious position of being sent to the Fleet Debtors’ Prison.
This is not to say, however, that he was “cribbed, cabined and con-
fined.” At that epoch it was possible to be technically a prisoner and
reside without the walls of the malodorous prison; it was possible to
live in private rooms within a certain prescribed area adjacent to the
prison. Payne had rooms therefore at No. 1 Naked Boy Court. And
there, while awaiting another propitious turn in Fortune’s Wheel, he
busied himself with various literary schemes. In his journal under
the date of January 2, 1821, for instance, he wrote:

Worked on and finished the “National Spelling Book.” I think
great improvement might be made in these works, by conveying infor-
mation in a style more familiar. I really think an American Spelling
Book or Easy Book for children might be contrived so as to give an
early knowledge of the country, its products and political history, and
distinguishing characteristics

469

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

About two weeks later the journal tells the story of the fortunate
arrival of two plays from France, the ultimate success of one of which
was to be instrumental in getting him released from the Debtors’
Prison. It is worth quoting as fully as possible from the entries, for
they give an appealing picture of Payne working under strain in
order to prepare the play for the stage :

Wednesday, January 17, 1821.

At about one today I received a parcel from France It

contained two melodramas by Victor: “Calas” and “Therese, Orphe-
line de Geneve.” Instantly left my history and read “Therese.” It
is admirably constructed and most interesting. I will set about it
forthwith.

Thursday, January 18.

Sent my shirt to the pawnbrokers this morning and got money
enough to buy the day’s provisions and begin Therese. Set to work

and got through part of the first act

Friday, January 19.

Finished the first act of Therese and began the second. I thought
it best not to go out but to proceed in my work. God grant it may
effect some good! I go to it with less eager anxiety and fear of rejec-
tion than I ever went to any work of the kind; repeated disappoint-
ments have cowed my ardour and tamed down my solitude. Let it
take its chance.

Saturday, January 20.

Finished the second act of Therese. I did not put the finishing to
it till the watchman was calling past six!

Sunday, January 21.

. . . . Not well all day. Wrote Therese till late at night. Passed
a miserably sleepless night counting the clocks ; and when I slept, the
characters rushed through my brain, all conversing and speaking the
emphatic passages.

Monday Night, Half Past Eleven, January 22.

I have this moment finished Therese. I was cooking my gruel and
spilled it on the last pages. The watchman is now calling “gone half
past eleven o’clock.” I knelt down and prayed Heaven to make this
new bantling propitious to my extraction.

This simple prayer was answered with dispatch. Immediately
after having finished the translation, Payne wrote Elliston, the man-
ager of Drury Lane. With some hesitation that gentleman finally
accepted the play and called rehearsals. These were rushed through,

470

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

much to the disgust of the principal players, and sixteen days after
Payne had received the play from France it was presented to the
captious audience at Drury Lane Theatre on the evening of February
2, 1821. Before the curtain rose the orchestra played a little known
overture by Mozart. The audience, thinking it was something new
by a new composer, roundly hissed it. “Therese,” however, worked
well on their lachrymose glands and the French “tear-jerker” was as
roundly applauded as Mozart had been hissed.

In his journal under the date of February 3, Payne wrote:

Well, “Therese” has succeeded triumphantly and splendidly and
I am enjoying my triumph with a box of pills before me, a bowl of
gruel, my feet in hot water, no fire and a terrific headache.

The play continued successfully at Drury Lane while two other
pirated versions were acted in other theatres. And on the American
stage it was also played without any benefit to poor Payne. He was
enabled, though, to make a settlement of the outstanding debts and
go free from Fleet. And once more he hied himself off to Paris
before the rest of his creditors caught up with him. When he did
return later to London to see about some business, he was forced to
do so under an assumed name.

In Paris he joined his good friend Washington Irving, whose
acquaintance he had first made in his adolescent heyday in New York.
During this period he had his usual ups and downs. At one moment
he was installed in a charming cottage at Versailles with a room in
town to use as a pied-a-terre. Again we find him sharing an expensive
apartment with Irving in the Rue Richelieu, near the Bibliotheque
Nationale. With Irving he collaborated on the translation and adap-
tation of French plays. Two of them, “Charles the Second” and
“Richelieu,” were quite successful. Irving’s name did not appear on
them.

But the important thing that came out of this period in Paris was
the libretto for “Clari, the Maid of Milan,” in which the song
“Home, Sweet Home” occurs and for which Henry Bishop wrote the
music. In Paris “Clari” was a sort of ballet-pantomime composed by
Rudolph Kreutzer in 1820. This same Kreutzer, who wrote thirty
operas, and innumerable works for the violin, is another who has had
his “conflict with oblivion” as Abbott calls it. His name is only known

471

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

today because a far greater musician dedicated a piano and violin
sonata to him.

The song, which was written and inserted at the last moment, was
really an expression of Payne’s own intense homesickness. A decade
of struggle and prodigious labor had got him nowhere. While this
mal du pays was gnawing at his lonely heart he wrote to his brother
as the year 1822 was being run out:

.... My yearnings towards home become stronger as the term
of my exile lengthens. I long to see your faces and hear all your

voices I feel the want of some of you — parts of myself — in

this strange world, for though I am naturalized to vagabondism, still
it is but vagabondism. I long for a home about me.

On May 8, 1823, “Clari, or the Maid of Milan,” Payne’s book
with music by Bishop, was produced at the Royal Theatre of Covent
Garden. Miss Marie Tree sang the song which the homesick Ameri-
can in Paris had distilled out of his loneliness. The simple words
from Payne’s heart winged their way to the hearts of the first night
audience with unmistakable certainty and thereafter circled the globe.
In a short time “Home, Sweet Home” was being sung everywhere.
Great prime donne like Adelina Patti and Jenny Lind never failed to
close their recitals with it. It can be truly said without fear of con-
tradiction that “Home, Sweet Home,” is the best loved and oftenest
sung song in the English language. Like its nearest rival, “Auld
Lang Syne,” it has become a folk-song as well as a commonly quoted
expression of a basic human emotion. And like the author of “Auld
Lang Syne,” Payne never cashed in on the international and continual
popularity of his song. It would take a financial expert to compute
the sums due these authors were royalties to be collected for each
printing of their songs.

When Payne sent “Clari” to London he also forwarded two other
adaptations which he had worked on: “Ali Pacha” and “The Two

Galley Slaves.” All three plays were sold to Kemble of Covent Gar-
den for £250. And soon Payne had to be a galley slave himself and
return to hack work to keep his boat from floundering in the sea of
debt. He attempted with little success to run a weekly paper known
as “The Opera Glass” — “for peeping into the microcosm of the fine
arts and more especially of the drama ” And finally, weary

47 2

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

of his two decades of bohemian ups and downs and dodging creditors,
he set sail for America, where he landed at New York on July 25,
1832, in the midst of a cholera epidemic.

He was well received, for during his absence no play of his that
had its premiere in Drury Lane or Covent Garden had been long in
crossing the ocean to be given in a pirated version for the edification
of the New York, Boston or Philadelphia playgoers. After a testi-
monial benefit was given for him in Boston, for instance, the “Tran-
script” there spoke of the fact that during each season it was a com-
mon thing for twenty-five of Payne’s plays to be given ! Having left his
native land a charming stripling, he returned, one of his friends said,
“a short, thick-set, plump, full-whiskered, middle-aged, English-
looking man.” But apparently as charming as ever and as ready to
attract friends. These old and new cronies rallied round him and to
the best of their ability tried to make up for the piracy that had left
him in so penurious a state.

For a few years after his arrival he toured America and was
given a series of benefits that netted him large sums: in New York,
for instance, $7,000; in New Orleans, over a thousand dollars. The
New York benefit, which was given in the Park Theatre on Novem-
ber 29, 1832, was one of the highlights of Payne’s career. The lead-
ing players of the day contributed their services. Charles Kemble
played Petruchio to his daughter Fanny’s Katherine; the great
tragedian, Forrest, played Brutus; Wallack played the comic role of
Captain Copp in Payne’s “Charles the Second” and naturally, “Home,
Sweet Home” was sung. A supper was given the prodigal author at
which flattering speeches were made by the Knickerbocker wits, and
a poem praising various works of Payne’s was read by his old boy-
hood friend, now a well-known dramatist, Samuel Woodworth.

The next decade was a strange Odyssey in Payne’s life. He
attempted to found a weekly with the fantastic title of “Jam Jehan
Nima, or The Goblet Wherein One May See Life!” But the wine
of his wit never filled it. He thought of writing, and indeed, began
“A Life of Our Saviour.” But he stopped when he heard that some-
one else was engaged in the same idea. He wandered about the coun-
try, became involved in the Cherokee episodes, suffered imprisonment
because of this, and wrote memorials and magazine articles about

473

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

this affair. He was a frequent visitor in Washington, where he had
many friends, and where on one occasion Jenny Lind sang “Home,
Sweet Home” for him at the close of one of her public recitals.

Finally a sinecure position as American Consul at Tunis was
obtained for the vagabond and improvident author. Payne’s friend
and admirer, the then Secretary of State Daniel Webster, persuaded
President Tyler to give him this commission. Why Tunis was chosen
is a mystery, but to the North African city Payne went, to take up his
consular duties; very nominal duties, leaving him time for tranquil
meditation on the more unsettled earlier years of his life. A few
years later, due to the machinations of Senator Thomas Benton, of
Missouri, who wished the consular post for one of his own henchmen,
Payne was recalled. In April of 1851 he was reappointed, however,
to the same post and it was there that death found him on April 9,
1852. It was there that he lay buried in the English cemetery for
thirty years. Then one day the wealthy Mr. Corcoran, of Washing-
ton, hearing the Marine Band play “Home, Sweet Home,” recalled
that its poor author lay buried in a foreign land, many thousand miles
from his homeland. With the expenditure of much money and the
tireless untying of knotted red tape, Corcoran finally managed to have
Payne’s body brought to America. It was landed at New York with
signal honors and reinterred in Oak Hill Cemetery, Washington, with
appropriate ceremonies and the singing of “Home, Sweet Home” by
a great chorus of massed choirs accompanied by a large brass band.

John Howard Payne died a bachelor. He had never had a home.
For many years, between 1823 and 1832, he had carried on a fitful
correspondence with Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, the poet’s widow.
She was a witty, animated lady, but the romance which many have
tried to read into her simple friendship with Payne had no basis in
fact. If anything at all, Mary Shelley was much more interested, as
her letters show, in the gentle, winning and more creative Washington
Irving.

Payne “courted,” if that is the word, a pretty Southern belle
whom he met in his travels in America in the fall of 1835. A letter
he wrote to this Mary Harden, of Atlanta, Georgia, is worth quoting
as an example of the nineteenth century literary love letter. It sounds
almost as though it had been lifted bodily from “The Manual of the
Perfect Letter Writer. The Secretary’s Cabinet Opened.”

474

JOHN HOWARD PAYNE (1791-1852)

Madam! [runs the letter] I did for a long time indulge in the
fallacious hope that fortune would have placed me in a more suitable
situation for making this communication to you. I unfortunately
have been disappointed and have endevoured to calm my feelings and
submit to my fate, yet the more I have striven to do so the more have
I been convinced that it would be useless for me any longer to attempt
to struggle with the sentiments I feel towards you.

I am conscious of my own unworthiness of the boon I desire from
you and cannot, dare not, ask you to give decisive answer in my favor
now, only permit me to hope that at some future time I may have the

happiness of believing my affection returned I have nothing

to offer you but a devoted heart and hand I entreat you to

reply to this letter, if but one word

The girl’s answer, prompted by the family, it is said, was nega-
tive, and undoubtedly in the same strain. And so John Howard
Payne has no descendants, while his literary children live on forgotten
under the dust of the new century. One day perhaps, as a sort of
dramatic salute to the founding fathers of American dramatic litera-
ture, some of his tragedies or comedies or Gallic melodramas may
be dusted off and allowed to strut their brief hour upon the modern
stage. In the meantime, with his monuments in Washington cemetery
and in Prospect Park, Brooklyn, John Howard Payne lives on in the
memory of some who recall from time to time that he was a gallant
New York bohemian who had his small measure of success in worlds
outside his own land; that he was a friend of Washington Irving
and other wits and fine spirits of his epoch; and that he wrote the
song that the world most quotes and sings : “Home, Sweet Home.”

475

Xke Totems of Al ask;

By Norris W. Matthews, F. A. I. C., Baltimore, Maryland

UR Uncle Sam owns a marvelous and wonderful territory
away up in the northwestern portion of the North Ameri-
can Continent. It is a remarkable place in many ways.
To the tourist visiting it for the first time, many new and
strange sights and facts are brought forth. It appears that a great
deal of false “information” and beliefs about this territory of Alaska
is held by the public.

The totem poles, with their bizarre forms, always attract a vast
amount of interest. The poles are visible in numbers nearly all over
southeastern Alaska, and yet how many visitors to that glorious
country really know, understand and appreciate what they see? They
realize that the totems are unusual and strange. But what do they
mean?

These picturesque creations can be seen to full advantage only in
their true home, at the edge of the ocean, amid tall cedars and hem-
locks, and in the shadow of lofty mountains. With their bold pro-
files, reminiscent of Asiatic divinities and monsters, they conjure
impressions strangely un-American in their surroundings of luxuriant
dark-green vegetation under skies of bluish mist.

Casual descriptions of poles or models of poles have been fur-
nished by Dr. Swanton, Lieutenant Emmons, Dr. Boas, Dr. New-
combe and others, but their notes usually appear without the neces-
sary historical context. It is too late now to recover much of this
knowledge. Consequently, there is actually a dearth of information
concerning totem poles.

Precisely where the totem poles first appeared and at exactly
what moment is an interesting, though elusive, point. The evidence
at hand eliminates several of the tribes as the originators. It is
agreed among specialists that the Nass River carvers were on the
whole the best in the country. Their art reached the highest point
of development ever attained on the northwest coast. The probabili-

476

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

ties are that totem poles proper originated among the Nisrae or
northern Tsimpsean of the Nass River.

The word “Alaska” means “Big Country.” We are told that
the term is a corruption of the native word Al-ak-sak or Al-ay-ek-sa,
meaning “Great Country.” This native word is not of Thlinget
Indian origin, but probably is from the Eskimo.

The Straits of Juan de Fuca and Georgia are those bodies of
water which separate Vancouver Island, British Columbia, from the
United States. The Indians north of these straits are divided into
five great divisions — Tsimpseans, Haidas, Thlingets, Aleuts, Tinnehs.
These divisions are subdivided into tribes and clans.

The Haidas live in the territory comprising the Queen Charlotte
Islands of British Columbia. This is the group of islands lying just
west of Hecate Strait and between Latitudes 5 2° and 540 20" North.
These people are essentially an island folk, fishing and hunting sea
animals being their principal occupations. They were formerly a
fierce, warlike people, and being excellent sailors, they went far from
home in their canoes, to make war on other tribes. Their country
is mountainous, cut by many inlets and harbors. The Haidas were
a very artistic people, their huge cedar canoes and their carved handi-
work being excellent works of art.

The Tsimpseans lived on the mainland just opposite the islands
inhabited by the Haidas, just south of the Skeena River, and they
were the great rivals of the Haidas. Both tribes held many slaves,
captured in their wars against weaker people. The Tsimpseans were
likewise very artistic, their carved ivory, wood, stone and horn being
real works of art.

The great Thlinget division still occupies villages on the islands
in what is now known as southeastern Alaska, north of Dixon
Entrance, and their territory extends as far as Cape Spencer. The
Thlinget division is composed qf the following tribes: the Tongass,
in and around Tongass; the Hanega, around Klawock on Prince of
Wales Island; the Stickeens, near the Stickine River and Wrangell;
the Kaaks, near Kake on Kupreanof Island; the Auks and Takoos in
the vicinity of Juneau; the Yakutats at Yakutat; the Sitkans at Sitka;
and the Chilkats near Haines, which is just south of Skagway. Other
tribes of this great Thlinget division are the Hoonahs, on Icy Strait,

477

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

the famous Kokwontons, and the Kicksuddies. Each community of
natives is entirely separate and is independent of all others. The
only bond is the totemic or tribal bond. Each tribe is headed by a
chief.

The Thlingets have no written language; it is an oral one and
therefore is constantly undergoing changes caused by the introduction
of English and Russian words. Their totemic symbols are the near-
est approach to a written language. To write their language requires
the invention of a new alphabet. Many clan or tribe names may be
spelled in English in a variety of ways, with equal correctness.

The Aleuts live entirely in southwestern Alaska and the Aleutian
Islands. The Tinnehs, sometimes called the Interior Indians, are
spread over a vast interior area. As these two divisions have no
totem poles or similar objects, they will not be here considered. The
totem poles are peculiar to the Indians of southeastern Alaska, being
entirely unknown to the Eskimos farther north.

There is no more interesting and intricate subject pertaining to
the natives of Alaska than totemism, and none about which most
people have such vague, indefinite and unsatisfactory notions. The
reluctance of the natives to talk to white people, their reticence and
the fact that these native Indians have no written language, make
the subject of totemism a very difficult one about which to gain com-
prehensive and true knowledge.

The word “totem” is derived, it is believed, from the Ojibway or
Chippewa “Ototeman.” It is a word that has been used in many
variations and senses, and by many scientists; but totems are, gen-
erally speaking, the symbols of an old belief in human kinship with
the animal world. The term “totemism” is used for a feature of the
religion and social organization of widespread occurrence among
primitive people throughout the world. All savages, it appears, are
believers in the human intelligence of animals. The Indians believe
that man and animals are actually akin to beasts and that they can
exchange ideas. That was the animistic idea of the very old Indians.
They say that certain men in certain tribes are actually descended
from or developed from certain animals. They still can claim rela-
tionship to these animals.

Everything had spirits; the birds, the mountains, the sea. A
family was made famous in proportion to the extent that some mem-

478

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

ber of that family came in contact with a spirit. The manner of com-
ing in contact with the spirit did not matter; it might be in what we
would call a very discreditable way, but that made no great difference.
The supernatural was that which gave the honor.

The objects whose spirits were used in their symbolism were pic-
tured entirely differently from those we think of today. Their whales,
ravens and other beasts and birds were represented as very grotesque,
sometimes fearful to gaze upon.

Therefore totem poles are to these Indians family trees. The
pole erected before a man’s house is a history of the family that lives
within. The fabled beasts carved on them are no stranger to them
than the lion and the unicorn are to us. They are symbols. They are
Indian heraldry of old families. Totemism is the very foundation of
the social structure and a visible and tangible expression of their
belief. It is very important and expresses their belief in the kinship
of men and animals and doubtless has its beginning in the belief
that the ancestors of man were animals. They are probably strong
evolutionists !

There are still remnants of totem marks in all of our city direc-
tories today. Fox, Fish, Drake, Crane, Wolf, Lyon — what are these
names but vestiges of ancient clan marks? The totem is the family
crest; it was placed on possessions much like a coat-of-arms. It
became a part of their art.

These weird, strange totems are the legends of a primitive folk.
They are relics of the old days in the past when eagle, whale and
wolf spoke the same speech as man.

The Thlingets are supposed to have borrowed their crest or totem
from the Haidas. The two great totemic divisions of the Thlingets
are the Yalkth (Crow) and the Tschak (Eagle). The various tribes
come under one or the other of these divisions. The entire native
population of southeastern Alaska belongs to either one or the other
of them. The patron bird of the Crow phratry is not the small bird
to which we are accustomed, but a huge imaginary creature somewhat
similar and of great strength and wisdom.

All natives of either main totemic division are regarded as broth-
ers and sisters, though they may be of different sub-totems of the
division. These cannot intermarry. They must seek mates in the

479

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

opposite fraternity. The husband and wife always belong to different
phratries — they are exogamous. According to a long-established cus-
tom, a Thlinget cannot marry one of his own totem, though no blood
relation. The children of the union belong to the totem of their
mother and, of course, receive their caste from her. The man may
not marry a woman descended from the same common ancestor as
himself.

The sub-totems of the Crow are the Beaver, Salmon, Seal and
Frog, and of the Eagle are the Wolf, Bear, Shark and Whale. Every
native family must be of both phratries, Eagle and Crow, the husband
of one and the wife of another, or vice versa, for as has been said,
they cannot marry into their own phratry. If a Crow man wishes
to marry, he must seek a wife in the Eagle division.

Sometimes the terms “clan” and “tribe” are used incorrectly. A
“clan” is one of the subdivisions of a “tribe” and not vice versa. A
tribe generally consists of several sub-totems, but of the same great
phratry, such as the Eagle or the Crow. A clan is composed of peo-
ple of the same totem. Each native belongs to a definite sub-totem
which determines the phratry to which that native belongs.

The members of the Crow phratry claim to have sprung directly
from the crow and the Eagles from the eagle. Due to their belief in
the animal origin of man, they never speak disrespectfully of any ani-
mal. They are strictly Darwinian. These people have a most fabu-
lous oral mythology, which has been handed down for generations.
No man will eat the flesh of any animal which he claims as kindred.
The totem crests define the bonds of consanguinity.

The natives were never idolatrous. They did not worship their
totems as gods or graven images.

It may be interesting to see why certain tribes claim certain crests
as their own. For instance, the famous Kokwontons claim the eagle
as one of their symbols, because once an eagle gave valuable help
to a member of that phratry. In time this member became an
eagle himself. And so the Kokwontons adopted the eagle. This
tribe claims several crests as its own.

The Kicksuddies claim the frog. A man and his wife, members
of the tribe, were in their canoe one day, when they heard a frog sing-
ing and finally discovered it in the stern of their canoe. The woman

480

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

took the frog and cared for it. Hence, the frog is the crest of the
Kicksuddies.

It is nearly impossible for one clan to use as its own the totem
recognized as belonging to another clan. Wars have resulted if the
forbidden symbol continues to be used.

Thlinget Indians need no surname for identification, as the family
crest serves this purpose. Their names refer to this crest or totem,
and as soon as one hears the name of another he knows exactly
where to place him. Certain proper names belong to certain tribes
and only members of the tribe to which the names belong can assume
them. By this system each name bears on the totem of the family
and the individual is classified as soon as his name is spoken.

One may ask why totems and totem poles were brought into being
by these Indians. The real reason is rather difficult to learn. Several
ideas have been advanced. A few, by authorities, are presented.

Professor Dali believes that they were “originated in a desire
to prevent war and to knit the tribes more closely together.” Others
believe that totems had their origin in the belief of an animal ances-
try and that the efforts for peace and the distinguishing of clans fol-
lowed as a consequence.

Reverend William Duncan, the Apostle of Alaska, an authority
on the natives, believes that totems were adopted to distinguish clans.
In one of his publications he states : “The names of the four clans in
the Tsimpsean language are, Kishpootwadda, Canadda, Lacheboo
and Eackshkeak. The Kishpootwadda, .... are represented sym-
bolically by the grizzly bear on land, the finback whale in the sea, the
owl in the air and the rainbow in the heavens. The Canadda sym-
bols are the frog, the raven, the starfish and the bullhead. The Lache-
boo take the wolf and the heron for totems. The Lackshkeak, the

beaver, the eagle, the halibut and the dogfish The creatures

I have just named are, however, only regarded as the visible represen-
tatives of the powerful and mystical beings, or Genii, of Indian
mythology.”

Interpreting the symbolism on totem poles is quite an art. The
figures are entirely unintelligible to the uninitiated. They are under-
stood only by those who are versed in “totem lore” and in Indian
mythology. Of all the hundreds of totem poles in Alaska, it is fairly

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

safe to say that scarcely two are alike. The same idea may be depicted
in many of them, but the figure forms may vary slightly. On genea-
logical totems, for instance, on which family histories are shown
graphically, the history of every distinct clan is different.

Totem poles were generally carved from a solid red cedar tree
trunk. From one to three years were required to carve a single pole.
One man would work with two or three helpers, all natives. They
used tools of their own manufacture, the principal tool being an adz.
Totem poles were costly, the cost varying from four hundred to
twelve hundred dollars each. This cost, of course, varied with the
amount of work necessary to produce a completed pole and with the
artistic value of the work. This value is also due greatly to the senti-
mental values attached to the pole. In height, they vary from quite
short one to tall ones, fifty or more feet high. Some of the natives
display great skill in their carving, the finished product being artistic
and pleasing. Other poles are absolutely fantastic and hideous, with
the grinning mouths, horns and supernatural forms of the animal
depicted. At the erection of the pole, a big feast was given and the
workers were paid for their services.

Totem poles are of four types. There are historical, genealogi-
cal, memorial and legendary totem poles. There are totems that
mark graves, and those that are monuments to record events and past
happenings. They may be family trees set up outside a house to tell
who lives inside — a directory. Members of a clan having the same
totem name, though living far apart and perhaps speaking different
languages, still consider themselves blood relations. In a strange vil-
lage, a man will see a totem pole with the crest of his own phratry; he
knows he will be welcomed at that house.

The poles are read from the top downward. Sometimes a totem
pole bears the semblance of a hat at the very top. The number of
rings on top of the hat states the number of important feasts given
by the totem owner. All poles do not have this symbol. In the illus-
tration of the Kadashan totems, the one to the right of the photo-
graph tells its story as follows :

It is surmounted by the figure of a man — the Creator. In all the
older totems, and the Kadashan poles are the oldest, the Creator is
shown as a man, while the more recent ones depict the Creator as a
Raven. Below is shown a Raven holding a man between his wings.

482

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

This is the grandson who made man. Below this figure is La-kig-
i-na, the father of Kayak. Chief Kadashan described him as “all
same devil.” Kayak, himself, is a great hero of the Thlingets, who
did mighty deeds of valor. La-kig-i-na wore a coat made from the
skin of a red codfish. The fins were so arranged that they extended
up and down his breast. This formed a saw and when he killed any-
one, which was very often, he would do so by ripping them on this
saw. Still farther down the pole is the spirit of La-kig-i-na. The
lowest figure on the pole is the Thunder Bird. This mythical bird lives
in the mountains, carries a lake on his back, and when he becomes
nervous and trembles he spills some of the water and this is rain.
This pole was erected shortly after the Russian occupation of Alaska.

The casual visitor to Ketchikan, the port of entry to Alaska,
always looks for two famous totem poles, Chief Johnson’s and Kyan’s.
The latter one is in a rather obscure location in a side street and a
very narrow one. It is surmounted by the Crane. Below this is the
Thunder Bird and at the bottom is a Grizzly Bear. Interpreted, this
means that the owner of the totem belongs to the Crane branch of
the Raven phratry and is married into the Thunder Bird branch of
the Bear phratry. Chief Johnson’s totem stands before his home.
It is very tall and is crowned by the figure of Kajuk, a fabled bird.
Families using Kajuk as their emblem are very aristocratic. The
very great height of this totem, and with Kajuk at the top, denotes a
very high-caste family. Below this bird are the two servants of the
raven. These two servants are the ones that obtained fire for mor-
tals. The Indians say that the two birds flew to the west, where the
fire was burning, stuck their straight bills into some pitch and then
ignited the pitch by means of the fire. They then flew back to man-
kind with the fire, but the heat and the weight of the burning pitch
caused their beaks to bend downward. Therefore, these birds are
always represented as having bent bills ! On the Chief Johnson
totem, below the raven servants, is the Raven, and below that is the
Frog Woman, with her children, the salmon.

The tallest and most elaborate totem pole in Alaska is at Sitka,
in the National Monument there. It is a beautiful piece of artistry
and workmanship and was presented to the United States for preser-
vation by Chief Sunny Heart, a Haida Indian of Kasaan.

483

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

Like most peoples, these Indians have a story of a flood which
once covered the earth. They point to clam shells high up in the hills
in many places as evidence of this event. They have a description of
the flood. Their Mount Ararat is on Prince of Wales Island near
Shakan. This flood, they say, laid the country waste and scattered
the Indians. When the flood abated, they made homes at the places
where their boats first grounded. New tribal relations were there-
fore formed and so it occurs that families may be of the same totem,
though they live miles apart.

When the flood came, the Raven took his mother in his claws,
flew away and stuck his beak into a cloud, hanging there until the
flood subsided. But the Raven’s beak has ever since been bent! This
is one of the most important family totems and is greatly reverenced,
similar to the great god Horus of old Egypt. The Raven is rever-
enced, but not as a “graven image.” The totem has nothing to do
with religion. It is a social symbol and is venerated, but not wor-
shipped. When the Indian refers to the Raven as the “creator,” he
is only saying that he was his first ancestor — Adam, but not Jehovah.

These Indians also have a story similar to our Biblical story of
Jonah and the whale.

In front of Chief Shakes’ communal house at Wrangell is a Bear
Totem. It is a carved figure of a crouching grizzly atop a white pole
perhaps ten feet high. It represents the Indian story of the flood.
When the flood came and the people of Shakes’ tribe fled to the top
of a mountain for safety, they found a huge grizzly bear also ascend-
ing. He led them upward. The totem pole represents the bear at
the top of the mountain and his footprints are plainly to be seen !

As has been said before, totem poles were erected in various places
and for one of four reasons, there being four classes of poles. The
carving of the poles was a popular art.

The historic pole recounts some important event in the history of
the particular family displaying the pole. Thrilling, daring and cou-
rageous conflicts are recorded on them.

The genealogical pole, as its name implies, is the recorded ances-
try of the family who live in the house before which the pole is
erected. At the very top is the wife’s totem, then the husband’s. Any-
one familiar with totem lore can tell by glancing at the top to what

484

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

totem the wife (the head of the house) belongs. The lower part of
the pole gives the connections of the other members of the family
within.

The memorial pole is a monument placed in the burial ground in
memory of the dead. It generally bears only the image of the patron
animal of the deceased member. Years ago, when the dead were
disposed of by cremation, the ashes were placed in a cavity in the
back of the memorial totem. These memorials usually faced the
waterfront.

The legendary pole perpetuates some happy legend or song, which
is particularly well thought of by a clan.

Totemism controls marriages and also indicates the rank and
caste of people, as already mentioned. The taller the totem pole,
the greater the man who owns it. The people of the Keet (grampus)
family or of the Hootz (brown bear) family are considered superior
to those of the Chich’g (frog) or of the Hot (salmon) family. In
daily intercourse, people are treated and respected according to their
family totem. In assemblages, and in gatherings of various kinds,
such as a potlatch, the totem determines the places of honor. In the
settlement of injuries or damages, totemism plays a major part. The
man of superior totem is always awarded higher damages than one
of an inferior crest.

Totemism governs the costume one shall wear at a dance or
potlatch, how much shall be spent on the dead, the size of his house,
the esteem in which he is held, the naming of children; in fact, prac-
tically the living of an entire life is governed by the totem. It marks
friends and foes. All of the same division, no matter where they go,
are friends and their homes are open to each other. Those of oppo-
site totem, while they may not be considered as enemies, still are not
friends in the truest sense and must be so treated.

Totemism determines the disposition of the dead. Every act
associated with the preparation of the body for burial must be done by
members of the opposite totem. Building the coffin, dressing the
body, digging the grave, interring the body, in fact everything neces-
sary is done by them and not by members of the totem of the deceased.

Totemism is a great incentive for ambition and thrift. Many
men have labored and saved systematically and industriously so that

485

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

he might have built and erected an expensive totem pole, or to throw
glory on his family “coat-of-arms,” by giving a huge feast, or in any
other fashion.

Totemism serves as a strong bond of mutual protection and help
among members of a totem. Each person is always ready to assist,
in any necessary way, a member of his own totem.

Totemism may be summed up by saying that it is legend, art,
recorded history, memorial, genealogy, and commemoration. It is a
person’s personal crest, his family “coat-of-arms;” he puts it on his
fish hooks, his paddles, his spoons — everything he owns, including
sometimes his own person.

The grampus and the brown bear are the highest symbols of
power; the crow is the highest symbol of wisdom; the eagle of sharp,
clear vision. These emblems, or crests, all belong to high caste fami-
lies. The mouse and the snail are the symbols of degradation and
weakness, and clans using these symbols are held in great disdain and
are looked down upon, because of their low caste.

The Thlingets formerly held slaves, which they captured in many
raids and wars on other tribes. These slaves were never allowed to
erect totem poles for themselves. It was considered a great affront
and insult for a low caste person to carve and erect a taller, more
elaborate, or more beautiful totem pole than the members of the
higher castes owned. Trouble ensued very quickly when this act was
committed, so that the tall poles erected by the low castes had to be
immediately taken down and shortened.

The art of carving poles belongs to the past. Racial customs are
on the wane everywhere, even in their former strongholds. Many
of the poles have fallen from old age, decayed, and disappeared.
Some were sold, others removed in maritime raids without the con-
sent or knowledge of the owners. Quite a few were destroyed by the
owners themselves during hysterical revivals under a spurious banner
of Christianity; for instance, the poles of two Tsimpsean tribes, in
the winters of 1917 and 1918, at Gitlarhdamks and Port Simpson,
near the Alaskan frontier.

The art of carving and erecting totems is not really as ancient
on the northwest coast as is generally believed. Popular misconcep-
tions that totem poles are hundreds of years old are fantastic. They

486

THE BEAR TOTEM AT WRANGELL,

Notice the bear’s footprints. The house pictured is the famous Communal House of Chief Shakes

THE TOTEMS OF ALASKA

could not be, from the nature of the materials and the climatic con-
ditions. A green cedar cannot stand upright much longer than fifty
or sixty years on the upper Skeena River, where precipitation is mod-
erate and the soil usually consists of gravel and sand. Along the coast
it cannot endure the intense moisture that prevails most of the
year and the muskeg foundation much more than forty years.
The totem poles of Port Simpson, for instance, all decayed on the
south side first, which is exposed to warm rainy winds. Most of the
well-known poles now in our parks and museums were carved after
i860, while not a few of those seen in Indian villages, such as Alert
Bay, were erected after 1890.

Totem poles are no longer being carved, colored and erected by
these Indians in southeastern Alaska. While there are still a few
of the old Indians still living, they are disappearing and the present
generation of younger Indians, having been rather thoroughly Chris-
tianized and not now accepting the beliefs of their forefathers, do
not have the incentive to erect the poles. Of course, opinions may
vary as to whether or not it is best to teach these aborigines the ways
of Christianity, but the fact remains that the weird, grotesque and
fascinating totem poles will be greatly missed when those still in
existence fall into decay. Already many of them are in a sad state
of decomposition. They are exposed to the damp climate of south-
eastern Alaska and only those on government reservations are cared
for. The totems now stand as mute, strange reminders of a past
age. It was a glorious age for the natives. They no longer show
their former dauntless spirit, their initiative and their perfection of
the totemic arts. They are losing in numbers and in most of those
qualities which have distinguished them from many aborigines. Per-
haps it can be demonstrated that all these changes are for the best.

487

Pioneers o f tke R ock-BounJ Coast

By, Gleason L. Archer, LL. D., President, Suffolk University,
Boston, Massachusetts

(Conclusion)

CHAPTER XXV

Preparing for the Great Migration

OHN WINTHROP had no sooner quitted London than a
storm broke loose in the ranks of the Massachusetts Bay
Company. It has previously been noted that some over-
zealous stockholders, without waiting for the Company to
decide which of the two plans it would adopt, had hastened to double
their subscriptions under the terms of the first suggestion. In the
recent strenuous meeting when the value of all shares in the Company
had been scaled down to one-third of their original value, these
enthusiasts had set by in serene belief that the valuation referred only
to stock purchased at the beginning of the great venture.

When they discovered, however, that all stock, old and new, had
suffered a change they awoke with a snort of wrath. They besieged
the Treasurer with clamorous demands that their recent payments for
stock be at once refunded. Since the money had been received in the
ordinary course of business and the stock duly issued, the Treasurer
was powerless to undo the mischief caused by their own rashness. A
man whose original venture had been £50 would now be entitled to a
trifle less than £17. If, however, he had rashly doubled his subscrip-
tion two days before the recent meeting his second £50 would have
shrunk in like manner. Had he waited until after the meeting before
making the additional £50 subscription, his holdings would now have
been worth £67, instead of being valued at less than £34. Truly there
was abundant reason for these unfortunates to raise the welkin at the
dilemma in which they found themselves.

So great became the controversy that despite the absence of Gov-
ernor Winthrop, who was visiting his family in Groton, England, a

488

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

General Court was convened at Mr. Goffe’s house in London on
December 15, 1629, to consider the matter. John Humphrey, the
Deputy-Governor, acted as presiding officer. Since the resolution
for the fixing of the value of the joint stock had been adopted at an
adjourned meeting of the previous General Court, it was thought fit
to submit the matter anew to the present meeting for confirmation
or rejection.

Since the success of the colonizing movement itself hinged upon
definite adherence to the new plan the leaders of the Massachusetts
Bay Company were zealous to defend it in its entirety, lest weakening
in one particular might weaken all. The minutes of the meeting are
therefore of especial interest:

“Mr. Deputy caused to be read the Acts and orders made at the
last General Court of the 30th of November; which being of great
consequence, as namely for the settling the joint stock, and managing
the whole business, it was desired the same should receive confirma-
tion by this Court. Upon debate whereof, some exceptions were
taken by those who had doubled their adventures, conceiving them-
selves to be wronged in having both their sums drawn down to so low
a rate as one-third part; alleging that the second sum was paid in
upon a proposition of trade which went not forward, and not as unto
the joint stock for the Plantation.”1

Captain Waller and William Yassall were the leaders of the
debate in behalf of the stockholders who had doubled their sub-
scriptions. Vassall was a man of great independence of mind, a son
of the gallant John Vassall, an alderman of London, who in 1588 had
fitted out and commanded two ships of war against the Spanish
Armada. His brother, Samuel, had been the first to resist the illegal
taxation of tonnage and poundage during the previous year and had
been imprisoned by the Court of Star Chamber. Coming as he did
from such a resolute family William Vassall might have been expected
to resist with all his might any act that smacked of injustice.

“I was content to abide by the decision of the General Court,” he
declared, “but with others who had made haste to double their sub-
scription I understood and believed that the vote applied only to the
former subscriptions — moneys that had been spent during the past

1. “Records of Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 67.

489

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

two years. I am willing to give my first fifty pounds to the Company
outright, but I insist that my second fifty pounds be allowed full value.
Why should money newly paid into the Treasury to rescue the Com-
pany from its present distresses be treated in the same manner?”
“The money was for joint stock,” replied George Harwood, the
Treasurer. “The vote applied to all joint stock then outstanding and
so far as the General Court was concerned no distinction was made.”
“This is a downright quibble,” retorted the angry man. “The
General Court could and did give the ten undertakers the right to
issue new stock at full value to all those who have paid moneys into
their hands since December first. Yet you say that it is right that
money paid into the Treasury a day or two before the meeting should
lose two-thirds of its value.”

“I made no such statement. I do not say that it was fair or just,
but I do say that under the vote, as passed by this assembly, it is
impossible to treat any of the joint stock issued before December first
differently from any other stock. It would have been entirely proper
to have passed a different vote or to have so amended the vote actually
passed as to permit the exception. It was not done and it is now too
late to change.”

“On the contrary it is not too late to change,” cried Captain Venn.
“We can undo the vote and act anew.”

“Not so,” cried George Harwood hotly. “This assembly passed
a vote after full discussion. It then persuaded ten of our number to
undertake a great risk in behalf of all. They have already incurred
obligations in reliance upon the vote and we cannot now say to them
that we have changed our minds.”

The debate now became general. The contestants in consequence
grew more and more extreme in their expressions of opinion. Cries
of impatience for a vote on the motion to confirm the vote of the
previous meeting eventually cut short the controversy.

“The Court in conclusion,” declare the official records of the
meeting, “put it to the question and by erection of hands every par-
ticular (of the vote) of the former Court was ratified and confirmed.”
Thus the General Court avoided the danger of undoing the impor-
tant results of the previous meeting, but it is significant that before
adjourning they left the matter of the true value of the double sub-
scriptions to a committee of three Puritan clergymen — Rev. John

490

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Davenport, Rev. Philip Nye, and Rev. John Archer — to endeavor to
reconcile the differences between the new undertakers and the aggrieved
subscribers.

How those differences were actually reconciled we have now no
means of knowing. The records of the Massachusetts Bay Company
abruptly cease at this point and do not resume until the tenth of the
following February. Since the chief duties of the Company itself
had now been taken over by the ten “undertakers” there was appar-
ently nothing in this interval of ten weeks that merited official action
by the Company itself.

We learn from John Winthrop’s domestic correspondence that
he was almost constantly in London, battling with the great prob-
lems incident to the task of chartering a fleet of transport ships and
of choosing from the flood of applicants for passage to America those
who seemed best fitted for pioneer life.

Fourteen ships, some of them owned outright, were scheduled to
sail for America at intervals beginning in March, 1629-30. The
“Eagle,” whose name was shortly changed to “Arbella” in honor of
the Lady Arbella, daughter of the Earl of Lincoln and the wife of
Isaac Johnson, was to be the flagship of the emigrant fleet. The
other ships were the “Lion,” the “William and John,” the “Ambrose,”
the “Jewel,” the “Talbot,” the “Charles,” the “Mayflower,” the
“William and Francis,” the “Hopewell,” the “Whale,” the “Success”
and the “Trial.” The business arrangements for the sailing of so
great a fleet of ships was a prodigious task. None of the “undertakers”
who had assumed the burden of the migration had anticipated so
great a demand for passage to America, nor the necessity for the hir-
ing of so many ships.

That they were virtually gambling on wind and weather was
recognized by every member of the Committee of Ten. The Gen-
eral Court of the Company had fixed the rate of passage money at
five pounds for each adult, with very much lower rates for children.
Should the fleet encounter adverse winds, or meet with delay from
other causes, a heavy financial loss must inevitably result to those
who had underwritten the expenses of the migration.

Anxious days and nights therefore succeeded one another until
mid-winter was passed. Governor Winthrop had gradually become
convinced that the new plan fell short in certain important particulars

491

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

of providing for the future of the Colony in New England. It was
all very well to expect the planters, when once settled upon the land,
to combine for their own protection. But months and even years must
elapse before the struggling colonists could be expected to contribute
funds adequate for public need. The Governor’s doubts and fears
found utterance one day at an informal meeting of the Adventurers.

“I am deeply concerned,” he told his associates, “lest we may
have overreached ourselves when the Company voted to put aside its
own responsibility for public needs in America. It is not to be expected
that we who run such grave risks of loss in the tasks committed to
our keeping should provide for support of ministers, the building of
houses of worship or forts and arsenals.”

“In that you are right,” responded Matthew Cradock evenly.
“By the terms of the vote, the joint stock is to bear the cost of the
voyage and provide for needful supplies for trade in the plantation.
Beyond that there is no obligation.”

“Yet if our plantation is to succeed we must take thought for
these things and devise some means of raising money to meet the
costs of the same. Think you that the godly people of our faith in
England would give money for this purpose?”

“Most certainly not, Master Winthrop. It has already been
thrown into my teeth by some of them that we ten “undertakers” are
scheming to make profits at the expense of the poor people who go
to the American wilderness. It matters not to our revilers that the
Company has set so low a rate of passage money that we are like to
be ruined if delays and dangers beset us on the voyage to America.
The Spanish War, Spanish privateers upon the sea, are like to endan-
ger our fleet.”

“These truly be dangers that no man of us may gainsay, but we
must raise money. I have thought that we might issue a different type
of stock for that express purpose — a stock that will not be concerned
with the perils that beset our joint stock.”

“What, a stock that shall have preference over ours and thus make
certain that we shall all be ruined?”

“Not at all. A stock that will not be paid until the seven years
have expired during which our joint stock is to have the trading privi-
leges of the plantation.”

“But no one would buy any such stock. They must have a chance
of present profit if they are to invest moneys.”

492

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“Truly, and my thought is that we do offer as a special inducement
a certain amount of land in the plantation for every fifty pounds of the
common stock.”

All those present at this conference agreed that the idea had dis-
tinct possibilities of success. It was thereupon resolved to submit
the matter to the whole Company for official action. Thus it came
to pass that on February io, 1629-30, there gathered at the house of
Thomas Goffe in London a General Court at which John Winthrop
presided. The minutes of the meeting contain the following sum-
mary of the main purpose of the meeting and the decision arrived at
on February tenth.

“Forasmuch as the furtherance of the plantation will necessarily
require a great and continual charge, which cannot with convenience
be defrayed out of the joint stock of the Company, which is ordained
for the maintenance of trade, without endangering the same to be
wasted and exhausted, it was therefore prepounded that a common
stock should be raised from such as bear good affection for the plan-
tation and the propagation thereof, and the same to be employed only
in the defrayment of public charges, as maintenance of ministers,
transportation of poor families, building of churches and fortifica-
tions, and all other public and necessary occasions of the plantation.
And the Court do think fit and order that two hundred acres of land
shall be allotted for every £50 and so proportionably for what sums
shall be brought in by any for that purpose.”2

When this difficult problem had thus happily been disposed of the
General Court turned its attention to two other matters of impor-
tance. It will be remembered that the Massachusetts Bay Company
had been greatly vexed by the fact that the grant of land covered by
their charter included territory formerly granted to Robert Gorges.
This confusion was no doubt due to ignorance of geography on the
part of the King’s advisers, yet Charles I had granted to the Mas-
sachusetts Bay Company land covered by a grant from his father,
James I, to Robert Gorges. John Oldham had been assigned a por-
tion of the Gorges’ rights, and we have already noted his unsuccessful
efforts to prevent the Bay Company from settling upon the land in
controversy. It will be remembered that the Company had con-

2. “Records of Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 68.

493

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

suited lawyers and had been advised that its own claim was superior
to the long-neglected Gorges’ grant. Acting under this advice they
had steadfastly refused to recognize Oldham’s claim. But now
appeared a more formidable claimant in the person of Sir William
Brereton, already a stockholder in the Company, who had secured
from the Gorges’ estate, on January io, 1629-30, an assignment of
the remainder of its claim to Massachusetts territory — “all the land
in breadth lying from the East side of Charles River to the easterly
part of a cape, called, Nahant, nearly ten miles along the coast.” This
grant was further described as extending twenty miles into the
mainland.

Sir William now presented his claim to the General Court, but
declared that he desired to join hands with the Massachusetts Bay
Company in the matter of colonization. The records of the meeting
of February 10, 1629-30, contain the following:

“Motion was made on the behalf of Sir William Brereton, who
by virtue of a late patent pretends right and title to some part of the
land within the Company’s privileges and Plantation, in New Eng-
land; yet nevertheless he is content not to contest with the Com-
pany, but desires that a proportionable quantity of land might be
allotted unto him for the accommodation of his people and servants
now to be sent over. Which request the Court taking into due con-
sideration, do not think fit to enter into any particular capitulation
with him therein, nor to set out any allotment of land for him more
than six hundred acres he is to have by virtue of his adventure in the
joint stock, nor to acknowledge anything due unto him as of right
by virtue of his said patent.”3

There was more in the minutes of the meeting to the same effect.
The matter was disposed of by appointing a committee to explain to
Sir William the personal friendliness of the General Court and the
desire of the Bay Company that he should join whole-heartedly with
the planters in their common purpose.

The second disturbing claim that was considered by the General
Court of February tenth was a demand from John and William
Brown for recompense for loss and damage sustained by them in New
England through the arbitrary action of John Endicott in arresting
them and sending them home to England. It will be remembered

3. “Records of Massachusetts,” Vol. I, p. 68.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

that the Brown controversy had been a live issue in the deliberations
of the Company for months.

“We must make an end of the business,” declared Governor Win-
throp. “We have had trouble and vexation enough because of the
Browns. Master Cradock has already purchased the goods left by
them in New England, yet they now clamor for damages.”

“In my judgment they are within their rights in this demand,”
exclaimed Thomas Goffe. “Master Endicott’s rash and intemperate
conduct has placed us in a very dangerous position. These men are
like to invoke the aid of the King’s Court unless we find some means of
satisfying them.”

A lively discussion thereupon ensued. It was finally agreed by
the General Court that if the claimants would agree in writing to
abide by the decision of arbitrators the matter be referred to Nathan-
iel Wright and Theophilus Eaton for final disposition.

In the ten weeks that had elapsed since the business affairs of the
Company had been taken over by the ten “undertakers,” great progress
had been made in the task of making ready for the great migration.
It has previously been noted that fourteen ships were eventually char-
tered for the accommodation of the prospective emigrants. Matthew
Cradock, the leading merchant in the group, was undoubtedly the
chairman of a subcommittee to engage shipping and to purchase sup-
plies. It is equally certain that Governor Winthrop acted as chair-
man of the subcommittee that received and passed upon the applica-
tions for emigration to New England. This latter task was of great
importance to the future Colony, and every effort was made to ascer-
tain the worthiness of each prospective colonist.

The process of making ready to depart from England was not an
easy one for the emigrants themselves. Having been accepted for
passage it thereupon became necessary for such person to dispose of
any houses and lands in England that might be owned by him. This
was not to be a mere voyage of adventure, but a final separation from
home and friends. Every prospective emigrant realized that it meant
the spending of the remainder of life in a strange land, in the midst
of unknown dangers and hardships. The time had been appointed
for the sailing of the ship to which an emigrant and his family were
assigned. It was thus needful for the household goods of such per-
son to be at the point of embarkation days prior to the appointed time

495

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

in order that such freight might be loaded into the hold of the ship.
Bristol, Plymouth and Cowes were the appointed ports of embarka-
tion. The greater part of the fleet was to assemble at Cowes, the
roadstead on the inner side of the Isle of Wight. This island lies in
the mouth of a bay and affords protection from ocean storms for ship-
ping to or from the great maritime cities of Portsmouth and
Southampton.

The port of Plymouth is located some distance farther west on
the coast of the English Channel, whereas Bristol lies at the head of
Bristol Bay on the west coast of England facing the Atlantic. Thus
three strategic points had been chosen by the Puritan leaders. Not
only might these various ports serve as convenient points of embarka-
tion, but they also possessed the additional advantage that adverse
winds capable of tieing up shipping in one port could not operate in
similar manner in both the other ports.

In the entire history of England there was probably never such
another condition of solemn leave-taking and widespread breaking of
home ties as preceded the great migration of 1630. The selling of
homes, the disposal of personal property unsuited for transportation
to the New World, could not have failed to impress the friends and
neighbors of those preparing to depart for New England that they
were witnessing great and prophetic events. Death of householders
customarily caused such a dispersal of worldly goods. For entire
families in the full flower of life to take similar action laid hold upon
the imagination even of the most phlegmatic dwellers in the English
towns and villages where Puritan families were making ready to
depart.

The fact of impending separation for life was moving enough in
itself, but the additional circumstance that departing friends were
about to face hardships and dangers, perhaps death itself, within a
few weeks, lent a solemnity to the occasion that in some cases led
to extravagancies of feeling that bordered almost on hysteria.

An instance in point is cited by the Rev. William Hubbard in his
“History of New England,” written prior to 1680. According to his
version, “Mr. John Winthrop, the Governor of the Company, at a
solemn feast amongst many friends a little before their last farewell
.... instead of drinking to them, by breaking into a flood of tears

496

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

himself, set them all aweeping .... while they thought of seeing
the faces of each other no more in the land of the living.”

Some historians, perhaps influenced by our austere New England
tradition that renders tears by grown men in a public assembly almost
unthinkable, have professed to doubt the accuracy of this story. Clas-
sical literature and the Bible itself furnish abundant evidence that it
was not considered unmanly for men to indulge in tears. Surely these
Puritan leaders who endeavored to order their lives by the Bible itself
had no austere notions on the subject of tears. This was certainly true
in the case of John Winthrop. Contrary to general belief he was really
a man of intense emotions that sometimes found vent in the very man-
ner indicated by Hubbard. Winthrop himself has left unquestionable
evidence of this fact in his letters to his wife. It may help us to under-
stand the true nature of this remarkable man if we indulge in another
glimpse at the domestic angle of his character.

We have before noted that Margaret Winthrop knew that she
would be unable to accompany her husband to America. On Febru-
ary thirtieth, she was some months advanced in pregnancy and, more-
over, had several small children for whom she must care. Winthrop
himself was absent in London from early January until the latter end
of February. Frequent letters passed between the pair. The yearn-
ing heart of the wife finally gave way to fears lest she might not see
him again before his departure. In a letter received by Winthrop on
February fifth, Mrs. Winthrop wrote:

“I have now received thy kind letter which I cannot read with-
out shedding a great many tears, but I will resign thee and give thee
into the hands of Almighty God, who is all sufficient for thee, whom I
trust will keep thee and prosper thee in the way thou art to go.
.... I begin to fear that I shall see thee no more before thou goest,
which I should be very sorry for and earnestly entreat thee that thou
wilt come once more down if it be possible.”

John Winthrop had evidently just written a letter to his wife in
which he had promised to come home in about two weeks. Upon
receiving this tender missive he added the following postscript:
“Being now ready to send away my letters, I received thine; the read-
ing of it has dissolved my head into tears. I can write no more. If I
live I will see thee ere I go.”4

4. “Life and Letters of John Winthrop,” Vol. I, pp. 373-74.

497

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Another evidence of the intense emotional nature of the man
exists in a letter written by John Winthrop to Sir William Spring on
February 8, 1630. Sir William had evidently written a touching fare-
well letter to the Governor. Winthrop’s letter is of great length.
The following extract contains the most emotional passages in the
letter :

“The apprehension of your love and worth together hath over-
come my heart, and removed the veil of modesty, that I must needs
tell you, my soul is knit to you, as the soul of Jonathan to David.
Were I now with you, I should bedew that sweet bosom with tears of
affection.”5

This amazing expression of regard of one man for another bears
eloquent testimony to the emotional state, bordering almost upon
hysteria, that all of these leave-takings had generated in the bosom
of the leader of a great host that was soon to embark on one of the
most significant migrations in human history.

In the final week of February, 1630, John Winthrop made his
promised visit to Groton and devoted himself to the winding up, so
far as possible, of his personal affairs in England. The last days of
companionship with his wife must have been very precious to each
of them. But London claimed him once more for there were many
tasks and problems that must receive attention before the chief mag-
istrate of the future Colony could be free to embark for America.

5. “Life and Letters of John Winthrop,” Vol. I, p. 396.

498

CHAPTER XXVI
The Fleet Sails for America

Having attended to the last details of the business affairs of the
migration Governor John Winthrop and the members of his official
staff severally departed from London and took their way to South-
ampton from which port they were to embark. The “Eagle,” now
the “Arbella,” and ten other ships had been made ready for the voy-
age. They were to report in Southampton on or before the middle
of March, 1630.

When the Governor arrived in the seaport town, which is now
one of the shipping centers of the world, he found himself surrounded
and besieged by eager emigrants who had reached there ahead of
him. They had arrived bag and baggage, but no ships of the expected
fleet were as yet in the port, and the unfortunate passengers were
obliged to take lodgings in the city. The explanation of delay is to
be found in John Winthrop’s letter to his wife under date of March
14, 1630.

“Mine Only Best Beloved,” he writes. “I now salute thee from
Southampton where by the Lord’s mercy we are all safe, but the winds
have been such as our ships have not yet come. We wait upon God,
hoping that He will dispose all for the best unto us. I supposed I
should have found leisure to have written more fully to thee by this
bearer; but here I meet with so much company and business, that I
am forced to borrow of my sleep for this.”1

In a letter to his son John, written on the same day, Winthrop
discloses the fact that Sir Richard Saltonstall and his family have not
yet arrived in Southampton. He also indicates to the young man
fears that he himself is likely to run out of money unless some may be
borrowed from an uncle of the youth.

Unfavorable winds continued to prevent the chartered ships from
reaching Southampton for a full week after the Winthrop party
arrived. On March twenty-second, however, the Company and their
belongings were safely on shipboard. They sailed down the estuary

1. “Life and Letters of John Winthrop,” Vol. I, p. 385.

499

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

as far as the harbor of Cowes, Isle of Wight, and were presently rid-
ing at anchor for the night. Winthrop again wrote farewell letters to
his wife and children.

Since Cowes is on the inner side of the island and there is a nar-
row channel of considerable length to thread before attaining the
open sea the task of leaving the haven was so hazardous as not to be
undertaken except when the winds were fair. Not all the ships were
ready for sailing. Thus it came to pass that only four of them were
in Winthrop’s immediate group — the “Arbella,” the “Talbot,” the
“Ambrose” and the “Jewel.” To the vexation and distress of the
company the ships were unable to sail on the morning of March
twenty-third. A head wind prevented passage through the channel.

The anxious Governor, troubled as he was at the mounting
expenses of the delay, might have been comforted not a little had he
known that the “Lion” with eighty passengers had already sailed
from Bristol and that the “Mary and John” with one hundred and
forty colonists had just succeeded in putting out from the port of
Plymouth, England. That latter ship had sailed on March twentieth.
The four ships of the Winthrop party were virtually bottled up for a
full week in the roadstead at Cowes, thus obliged to remain inactive
while precious days slipped past. Governor Winthrop wrote letters
or spent his time in conferences with his associates.

On March 23, 1630, a meeting of the Governor and his assist-
ants was held on board the “Arbella.” John Humphrey, the Deputy-
Governor, had decided not to emigrate to America. This meeting
was held to fill the vacancy. Thomas Dudley, by common consent,
was chosen Deputy-Governor. William Coddington, Simon Brad-
street and Thomas Sharpe, previously elected assistants, now took
the oath of office.

Two of the letters written to his wife by John Winthrop during
this unwonted delay are still in existence. The first was written on
board the “Arbella” immediately after reaching the roadstead on
March twenty-second. The wind at the moment of writing was fair
and the mariners expected to undertake the passage next morning.
Written briefly and in evident haste this farewell letter was as fer-
vently religious as the other had been.

The second letter was written to his wife on March twenty-eighth.
For historic interest it is of utmost importance, but as a letter of

500

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

a fond husband to his wife it should rank among the noblest of its
kind ever penned.2

“My Faithful and Dear Wife,” the letter began. “It pleaseth
God, that thou shouldst once again hear from me before our depar-
ture, and I hope this shall come safe to thy hands We are all in

very good health, and, having tried our ship’s entertainment (i. e.,
food and sleeping accommodations) now more than a week, we find it
agrees very well with us. Our boys are well and cheerful and have
no mind of home. They lie both with me, and sleep as soundly in a
rug (for we use no sheets here) as they ever did at Groton.”

This passage needs explanation. Margaret Tyndal, Winthrop’s
third wife, had married him on April 24, 1618. Their first son,
Stephen, was born March 24, 1619. The second son alluded to in
this letter was Adam Winthrop, born April 7, 1620. Thus we may
glimpse the loving father, granting the wish of his two lively young-
sters of ten and eleven by taking them with him on the great adven-
ture and thus sparing his wife the care and responsibility of bringing
them with her when she was to follow her husband to America in
1631. Of course, these robust lads rejoiced in the novel experience
of being sailors — real he-men who slept without sheets — covering
themselves with a sailor’s rug at night. Anyone who knows anything
about small boys may realize that Governor John Winthrop had his
hands full, so to speak, to keep these lads out of mischief during the
seven days of enforced delays in the roadstead at Cowes.

“The wind has been against us this week and more,” he writes.
“But this day it is come fair to the north, so as we are preparing (by
God’s assistance) to set sail in the morning. We have only four ships

ready The rest of our fleet (being seven ships) will be ready

this sennight. We have spent now two Sabbaths on shipboard very
comfortably (God be praised) and are daily more and more encour-
aged to look for the Lord’s presence to go along with us.”

Quite evidently Winthrop and his pious companions had no
thought of blaming the Almighty for the fierce winds that hindered
their passage. No doubt, if put to it to account for the phenomenon,
they would unhesitatingly have cast the blame upon the Evil One
himself.

2. “Life and Letters of John Winthrop,” Vol. I, pp. 388, 389.

501

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

The next sentence in Winthrop’s letter displays the concern of a
parent at the presence of disease on one of the ships of the fleet. This
particular disease must have afforded him considerable anxiety for
the welfare of his own small children.

“Henry Kingsbury hath a child or two in the “Talbot” sick of the
measles, but like to do well. One of my men had them at Hampton
but was soon well again.” Measles on shipboard could be a very serious
matter.

The Governor next offers an interesting bit of information con-
cerning the ships that were scheduled to sail to New England. “We
are in all our eleven ships,” he declares, “about seven hundred per-
sons, passengers, and two hundred and forty cows and about sixty
horses.”

The remainder of the letter contains phrases of exquisite tender-
ness, as will be seen from the following extracts :

“And now my sweet soul, I must once again take my last farewell
of thee in Old England. It goeth very near my heart to leave thee,

but I know to whom I have committed thee Oh, how it

refresheth my heart, to think that I shall yet again see thy sweet
face in the land of the living ! That lovely countenance, that I have
so much delighted in, and beheld with so great content! I have
hitherto been so taken up with business, as I could seldom look back
to my former happiness ; but now when I shall be in some leisure, I
shall not avoid the remembrance of thee, nor the grief for thy
absence.”

Then follows a reference to one of the most unusual spiritual
pacts between husband and wife on record. Quite evidently the mat-
ter had been arranged between them during Winthrop’s farewell visit
to his wife in Groton. But here it is :

“Thou hast thy share with me, but I hope the course we have
agreed upon will be some ease to us both. Mondays and Fridays, at
five of the clock at night, we shall meet in spirit till we meet in per-
son. Yet, if all these hopes should fail, blessed be our God, that we
are assured, we shall meet one day, if not as husband and wife, yet in
a better condition. Let that stay and comfort thy heart. Neither
can the sea drown thy husband, nor enemies destroy, nor any adver-
sity deprive thee of husband or children. Therefore, I will only take

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

thee now and my sweet children in mine arms, and kiss and embrace
you all, and so leave you with my God. Farewell. Farewell.”

On the eve of sailing from Cowes Governor John Winthrop had
a cause for uneasiness that he did not mention either in his letter or
in the first entries in the journal which he was to begin on the follow-
ing morning. In earlier pages of this history it has been recorded
that Winthrop had three grown sons by his first wife. One of these
sons, Henry Winthrop, about twenty-three years of age, had decided
to emigrate with his father despite the fact that he must leave behind
him his young wife because of an impending event of great conse-
quence to the Winthrop family. Henry was perhaps the most enter-
prising and forceful of the Governor’s sons. He had participated in
planting operations in the Barbados when only eighteen years of age.
By unwise speculation in tobacco, which proved so foul when it reached
England that even hardened addicts of the weed would have none of
it, young Henry became involved in debt, later to return to England.

Now that he was emigrating to America his father had arranged
that the young man should have comfortable quarters aboard the
“Arbella.” The long delay at Cowes evidently grew too monotonous
for Henry Winthrop. Finding that an ox and ten sheep which he
had provided for shipment to New England were not in the live stock
aggregation aboard ship Henry asked permission of his father to
go ashore and fetch them. This occurred in the early morning of
March twenty-ninth.

Since the ship could not get underway for an hour or so the Gov-
ernor gave permission, little dreaming of the tragic consequences that
would eventually result from this seemingly trivial errand. In the
confusion and bustle of preparation for departure Matthew Cradock
arrived for a final conference on shipboard. He brought with him
the captains of the other three ships of the fleet. It was agreed, as
Governor Winthrop writes in his journal, that “These four ships
should consort together; the ‘Arbella’ to be Admiral, the ‘Talbot’
Vice-Admiral, the ‘Ambrose’ Rear-Admiral and the ‘Jewel’ a Cap-
tain; and accordingly articles of consortship was drawn up between
the said captains and masters.” It may appear somewhat amusing to
landsmen that a group of four sailing ships should deem it necessary
to make such a ceremony of determining their respective ranks during
the voyage. In the days of sailing ships, however, especially in war

503

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

time, it was of utmost importance that every detail of mutual coop-
eration or defense should be worked out in advance of sailing.

“At ten of the clock we weighed anchor and set sail,” the Gov-
ernor wrote in his journal. Alas for his hopes ! The ships had
progressed but eight miles or so down the channel between the Isle
of Wight and the mainland of England when they encountered a
heavy gale from which they had hitherto been sheltered. Winthrop
had remained on deck a good part of this time. The sight of the
storm-tossed channel, as they neared the port of Yarmouth, sent the
Governor in haste to the captain of the “Arbella.”

“What is your judgment, Captain Milborne, as to sailing upon
yonder sea ?”

“That it were too dangerous even to venture forth, Master Win-
throp. We had best wait in the roadstead at Yarmouth until the
wind changes.”

“Think you we can sail again in the morning?”

“Of that you are as fair a prophet as I am. No man can forecast
when these beastly winds will change. I have know them to blow
steadily for weeks on end with never a chance to put out to sea.”

“For weeks, you say?”

“Aye, for weeks. Yes, and longer, even. Captain John Smith,
you will perhaps remember, was ready to sail one spring day many
years ago, and he was held in port for three months and so lost his
voyage.”

Captain Peter Milborne was not in a cheerful mood. He glared
at the rolling ocean with such an appearance of wrath that Sir Rich-
ard Saltonstall and others of the Puritan leaders who now came up
on the captain’s deck rallied him upon it. Their own faces length-
ened, however, when they realized that the “Arbella” was swinging
into the roadstead of Yarmouth. Sails were being slackened. The
mariners were making ready to cast anchor.

“If the Lord will that we tarry a day or two longer in English
waters it may be for the best,” declared Governor Winthrop resign-
edly when they had discussed the melancholy prospect at some length.

“You speak truly, Master Winthrop,” rejoined Sir Richard Sal-
tonstall, gravely. “Who knows but delay may save us from the ships
of Dunkirk now laying in wait for English merchantmen, according to
all reports.”

504

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“The Dunkirkers had best keep their distance from us,” declared
Thomas Dudley hotly. “We have twenty-eight pieces of ordnance
on the ‘Arbella’ alone. They tell me our gunners are as good as any
afloat.”

“We shall give a good account if trouble besets us,” said John
Winthrop. “We have fifty-two seamen to fight our ship and there be
many of us who have served in the wars, which reminds me that we
should organize ourselves and every man know his place ere we put
out to sea.”

The captain’s doleful prophecy of adverse wind was abundantly
fulfilled. So great was the wind next day that the ships lay close
furled, rocking in the heavy ocean surges that penetrated even to
their anchorage. The tide also was amazingly strong and whether
ebbing or flowing it caused the ships to strain at their cables. On the
morning of the third day, April 2, 1630, a boat was observed to put
out to the ‘Arbella.’ When Governor Winthrop beheld one of his
servants who had accompanied his son Henry ashore he breathed a
sigh of relief because the latter’s absence had worried him greatly.
When the boat came along side and Winthrop beheld only his serv-
ant and another whom he knew to be a servant of William Pelham;
but neither his son nor Pelham himself, he cried out in dismay.

“Please, sir,” cried his retainer, now a sorry and bedraggled fig-
ure, “the young gentlemen are coming by boat, but the wind and tide
do hold them back and so we were set ashore to come on foot.”

“Aye and we tramped through beastly mud and waded through
puddles,” growled the Pelham servant angrily, “and we be half dead
from rain and cold.”

“Why didn’t they keep you with them?”

“That’s wot I’d like to know. Beastly shame I calls it.”

“Come now, have done with sniffling,” retorted Winthrop’s serv-
ant angrily. “Mud and rain be bad enough, but this whimpering oaf
has been a worse trial to me than all the mud in the Isle of Wight.
Master Henry sent us to bring you word of his safety and to tell you
that he will reach the ‘Arbella’ before the wind comes fair. His boat-
men say that with the ebb tide, when the wind changes, they will set
the young gentleman aboard before you sail.”

“Why did they not come on board at Cowes? The ox and sheep
had no difficulty in crossing the gang plank.”

505

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“The young gentlemen met some friends and we tarried for
them.”

“Aye at a public house and this fine chap got so full of strong
water that he wanted to fight mine host and all his servants.”

“Have done with prating,” cried John Winthrop sternly, for all
eyes were upon the men, “and do you go to your quarters and change
at once to dry clothing.”

At an informal meeting of the Governor and his staff held on the
previous evening it had been decided, unless there should be a change
of weather by morning, that a solemn fast should be held on ship-
board. The weather was now even more rainy and tempestuous than
before, so the fast day was in progress when the two servants had
arrived. A large part of Friday, April 2, 1630, was devoted to a
general prayer service in which the favor of God was earnestly
invoked. But when they had finished their religious devotions the
wind continued and the rain fell as before.

The ceremonies of the day were no sooner ended than a passenger
hurried to Governor Winthrop with an alarming bit of information.
During the fast, while the others were engaged in religious observ-
ances, two men of the party had stolen away into the ship’s interior
where liquors were stored. They had bored a hole into a small bar-
rel of ardent spirits and had stolen a quantity of it. Winthrop pres-
ently summoned his advisers for an important conference.

“Small wonder that God hears not our prayers,” he announced
bitterly, “for this man brings me knowledge that two of our num-
ber, even while we were at prayers, were stealing strong water from
our stores and making merry withal.”

“How came you by this information?” demanded Thomas Dud-
ley, of the informer.

“Well, sir, when I went to my berth, after our services were
ended, these men who sleep in the same section of the ship were
drinking and carousing in shameful manner.”

“I have already made certain of the facts,” said John Winthrop,
“and have arrested the miscreants, but I have waited until this court
could convene before having them brought to my cabin. My small
sons have been sent to tell the guards to bring them in. Here they
come now.”

At this point it was needful for the Governor to excuse himself
for a brief session with Stephen and Adam Winthrop, who had

506

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

returned with the sullen prisoners and their guards. With all the
curiosity of small boys the youngsters had disregarded their father’s
injunction that they stay away during the trial and had stolen into the
room, relying perhaps on their parent’s preoccupation to insure their
being overlooked during the interesting proceedings. But John Win-
throp had strict ideas about exposing innocent childhood to knowledge
of the depravity of their elders, and so the lads were gently but firmly
ousted from the cabin.

The culprits had not counted upon this grave assembly of judges.
In fact, they had stolen the liquor in bland assurance that they them-
selves would not be missed from the assembly. If the loss of the
liquor was later discovered it would, they reasoned, be easy enough to
cast blame upon the crew of the “Arbella.” While both men were
the worse for drink when first discovered they were now so subdued
by the dilemma in which they found themselves that they were con-
strained openly to admit their guilt.

“Please, sirs, we wuz hungry,” whined one of them in attempted
extenuation of his fault.

“Aye and so were we,” retorted Governor Winthrop sternly.

“And I had a great pain in my stummick.”

“A pain in your stomach! Well, we will see about that and other
pains as well. While all of our Company were praying to the
Almighty to send us favorable winds for our voyage you two miser-
able varlets must needs undo all our labors by breaking our solemn
fast and by stealing strong waters. What say you, my friends, shall
we not set these scoundrels in bolts this night that they may meditate
upon their sins?”

This sentence being approved by the Deputy-Governor and Assist-
ants the men were led away to endure the painful ordeal of lying
in bolts all the night. Punishment by being set in the stocks or “bil-
boes” was later to be a common method of correction. Lying in bolts
was no doubt the same as being “put in irons,” a type of fetter used
on shipboard in Colonial days. At any rate the punishment was suf-
ficiently drastic so that next morning the younger thief was excused
from further physical ordeal. The older culprit was publicly flogged.
The two thieves were kept on bread and water for twenty-four hours.
Thus did John Winthrop and his associates, on April 2, 1630, pun-

507

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

ish the first criminal offense that came before them in their capacity
as magistrates.

For two additional days the “Arbella” and her three companion
ships rode at anchor in the roadstead at Yarmouth. They had now
been six days in this locality. The wind and tide, however, proved too
strong for the anchors of the “Talbot.” She drifted dangerously and
on Sunday evening, April fourth, gave up the attempt to remain at
Yarmouth. Weighing anchor she returned to the safety of Cowes.
The same experience befell the “Jewel” and the “Ambrose” so that
the sturdier craft, the “Arbella,” was left alone at Yarmouth.

On Monday, April fifth, Governor Winthrop had no greater news
to write in his journal than the adventure of a humble maid servant in
the family of Sir Richard Saltonstall and an obscure helper of the
ship’s carpenter. It seems that the girl was engaged in her duties
about the cookroom and was at the moment of the accident close by a
grating and an open hatchway leading into the hold. The carpenter’s
helper, a very active young man, chanced to pass on the double-quick.
The girl was startled by his sudden appearance. In her fright she
stumbled, fell onto the grating and was rolling into the open hatchway
when the carpenter’s helper, “with incredible nimbleness” as Win-
throp expresses it, caught and held her from falling into the hold of
the ship.

John Winthrop was by this time considerably vexed that his son,
Henry, and young Pelham, had not followed the example of their
servants and made their way overland to Yarmouth. They could
easily have hired horses for the six-mile overland journey.

“You must not be too hard on the young gentlemen,” said Sir
Richard Saltonstall as the two men lounged in the Governor’s cabin.
“Remember that English inns and gay companions mean more to
young bloods than they would to men of our age and circumstance.”

“But we may sail for New England at any time.”

“Would God that we might, Master Winthrop. I like not this
endless tossing at anchor. If we were on the ocean and moving in
some direction it would be different. Two weeks on shipboard and
still in this beastly channel.”

On Tuesday, April sixth, in the early morning, a boat was observed
to leave the wharf at Yarmouth and to put out toward the “Arbella.”
Again the Governor’s hopes of the arrival of his son were dashed.

508

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

The visitor who now boarded the ship proved to be a person of con-
sequence. He was a Captain Burleigh, a man of great age, the Gov-
ernor of Yarmouth Castle, whose towers overlooked the harbor of
Yarmouth. In the days of Queen Elizabeth, Burleigh had served as
a ship captain in the war with Spain. With three sons he had been
captured by the enemy and had languished in a Spanish prison for
three years. The aged visitor had come to pay his respects to the
Winthrop party. They breakfasted together very pleasantly and
when the Governor of the Castle departed the captain of the “Arbella”
caused a salute of four guns to be fired in his honor.

That same day, in the afternoon, a second boat put out from the
main wharf to the “Arbella,” bringing Matthew Cradock, the former
Governor of the Company.

“I have come to tell you,” he said, after greetings were over, “that
the ‘Talbot,’ the ‘Jewel’ and the ‘Ambrose’ have fallen down into
Stokes’ Bay at the eastern end of the island. They desire you to join
them for they propose to sail by way of St. Helen’s Point.”

“Why from St. Helen’s Point rather than from here?” demanded
the captain of the “Arbella.” “The wind has just changed to the
northeast. Were they here we might sail within the hour. The wind
is now in the right quarter for us but not for them.”

“They should be on their way to us at this very minute,” cried
John Winthrop in vexation. “This day brings us the first favorable
wind that we have had in weeks and they are at the other end of the
island. Surely they can rejoin us with ease if they would make the
effort.”

“I care not how you sail or how they sail,” exclaimed Cradock
in disgust. “Our substance is being wasted daily and we should not
stand upon ceremony.”

“Nay, not upon ceremony,” rejoined Captain Peter Milborne,
“but the wind is right for them to sail to us. We cannot possibly sail
to them. Both wrind and tide are against us. They should come to us
at once.”

In this dilemma Governor Winthrop called his official staff into
conference. A vote was taken commanding the three vessels to sail at
once for Yarmouth. Matthew Cradock agreed to set out immediately
on horseback to carry the message to Stokes’ Bay. Knowing that the
ships could not possibly sail until next day Lady Arbella Johnson and

509

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

the gentlewomen of the party decided to take advantage of fair
weather and go ashore to refresh themselves. Isaac Johnson and some
other men accompanied the ladies on this last visit to English soil.

It was not until the afternoon of April seventh that the consorts
of the “Arbella” arrived at Yarmouth. Preparations were now got-
ten underway to sail next morning. Henry Winthrop had not yet
arrived and the Governor was still uncertain as to his whereabouts.
Farewell letters had been written so many times during the three
weeks since the Winthrop party had arrived at the port of embarka-
tion that there is little need for further mention of missives of this
nature. On this last day at the roadstead of Yarmouth, however, the
Governor and Company prepared a general farewell letter to their
brethren of the Church of England and a request for prayers that is
worthy of serious attention. No action on their part has been sub-
ject to more controversy as to motives and policy than this general
epistle of the departing emigrants dated April 7, 1630. The Puri-
tan leaders have been charged with insincerity because their written
sentiments on that occasion proved to be so directly in conflict with
their later conduct. Some have roundly condemned them, whereas
others have sought to prove an essential harmony in words and
actions.

The true explanation may well be that the action of the Endicott
group at Salem the previous year in setting up a church of their own
had shocked and distressed those Puritans who were still in England.
The news had by this time reached and thoroughly incensed the King
and the subservient clergy of the Established Church. The depart-
ing host, still under the shadow of the ancient church and unable to
foresee the practical difficulties that awaited them in America, might
have experienced genuine sorrow in leaving England. Thus they
could the more readily have penned the words for which they have
been accused of hypocrisy. The following extract from the letter
addressed to the Church of England, will illustrate the emotional
extravagances to which John Winthrop, Sir Richard Saltonstall,
Thomas Dudley and others of the official board affixed their signatures :

Howsoever your charity may have met with some occasion of dis-
couragement through the misreport of our intentions, or through
the disaffection or indiscretion of some of us, or rather amongst us
.... yet we desire you should be pleased to take notice of the prin-

510

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

cipals and body of our Company, as those who esteem it an honor
to call the Church of England, from whence we rise, our dear Mother;
and cannot part from our native country, where She especially resid-
eth, without much sadness of heart and many tears in our eyes, ever
acknowledging that such hope and part as we have obtained in the
common salvation we have received in her bosom, and sucked it from
her breasts.3

This is strong language from men who were so soon to cast off
the yoke of the Mother Church and yet it no doubt expressed their
feelings at the moment of departing from England. We need not
therefore set down this remarkable letter to empty phrases of shrewd
diplomacy. The epistle was of considerable length. It asked for
the prayers of the brethren in the Church of England, but in no para-
graph was there any definite promise to set up the Church of England
in America. John Winthrop makes no mention of the letter in his
journal for that day, so we have no certain knowledge of the circum-
stances under which the letter was written and signed.

At daybreak Thursday, April 8, 1630, the wind was still in the
right quarter for passage and so the signal for departure was run up
to the mast head of the “Arbella.” It was six o’clock and the sun
shone fair on the deck of the flag ship of the little fleet when the
creaking windlass announced that the cable was being hauled for the
long expected departure.

True to their natures as God-fearing men John Winthrop and
his associates gathered on deck for a solemn religious service while the
anchors of the “Arbella” were being hoisted to their proper niches at
the bow of the ship and the voyage thus officially begun. The inflow-
ing tide was running with considerable power through the narrow
road that led to The Needles, which formed the gateway to the sea.
It became necessary for the “Arbella” and her consorts to fight their
way against this tide. The breeze proved insufficient for genuine
progress. According to Winthrop’s journal it took four hours for
the ships to accomplish a five-mile run to The Needles. Some smaller
ships that followed in their wake were unable to stem the tide at all
and consequently were obliged to wait until the ebb tide could assist
them down the channel to the open sea.

3. Young’s “Chronicles of Massachusetts,” pp. 295-99.

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

It was ten o’clock in the morning of April eighth, according to
Winthrop’s journal, when the Puritan fleet of four ships entered the
English channel. Weeks of waiting were rewarded at last. John
Winthrop and his associates could now breathe prayers of thanksgiv-
ing. However the winds might blow thereafter they were now afloat
on the vast ocean, or at least upon the English Channel, with plenty
of room to tack and turn and thus to fight their way toward New
England.

5 12

CHAPTER XXVII
Stirring Incidents of the Voyage

It was fortunate indeed that the “Arbella” and her consorts suc-
ceeded in working their way into the English Channel when they did
for that very afternoon the wind again changed to the very quarter
that had proved so disastrous to their previous attempts. With the
change of wind the ships became virtually becalmed. The “Arbella”
seems to have made more progress than the others since Governor
Winthrop wrote in his journal : “Our captain tacked about, and

putting his fore-sheets aback stays, he stayed for the rest of the fleet,
and as they came by us we spake to them.”

Very little progress was made during the afternoon because of the
faintness of the breeze. At eight o’clock in the evening Captain
Peter Milborne decided to cast anchor and to wait for the ebb tide,
a decision that he soon joyfully altered. Within two hours a fair gale
of wind sprang up from the north. Setting a light in the poop of
the “Arbella” as a signal to the other ships of the fleet, the flagship
weighed anchor and set sail in a westerly course. By daylight Friday,
April ninth, the “Arbella” was opposite Portland, England. Having
outsailed her consorts, the flagship was forced to shorten sail, but
continued to run before what Winthrop describes as “a merry gale.”
We may well suppose that any gale at all would have been regarded
as a merry gale by those who had been held for three weeks in a
narrow channel between an island and the mainland.

Now that the ships were on the great highway of nations, the
English Channel, it was needful to be on guard against hostile ships,
since England and Spain were at war — the evil results of the blunder-
ing of Charles I and his late favorite, the Duke of Buckingham. Spain
at this period of European history was still holding sway over what
was known as Spanish Netherlands. Dunkirk was one of the great
ports of that country and from it hailed a large part of the fighting
ships of Spain’s hostile fleet. With this explanation we may fully
appreciate the significance of the next happening on shipboard.

The Governor and his small sons had been among the first of the
passengers to reach the deck of the “Arbella” on this memorable first

513

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

morning at sea. They had gazed with delight at the coastline of
England which filled the whole northern horizon. The joyous expe-
rience of a fair and beautiful April morning on the ocean, their stout
ship with her decks atilt and her sails filled with a spanking breeze,
was almost too good to be true. When they had tramped the deck for
a time, the proud father with a small son on either side and clasping
hands with them for safety, the three went below decks to breakfast.
Mealtime, at least in fair weather, was a joyous affair aboard the
“Arbella.” The Governor and his sons sat at the captain’s table,
as did the Lady Arbella Johnson and her husband. Sir Richard Sal-
tonstall and his family were there also. The English people have
always attached great importance to social rank. To have the daugh-
ter of an English Earl on shipboard was deemed an honor of such
consequence that the lady herself was regarded with great deference.
It will be remembered that the flagship of the fleet upon which she was
a passenger had been named the “Arbella” in her honor.

Small wonder therefore that with this lady of illustrious birth in
the dining room three times a day mealtime aboard the flagship had
become a social event. Fortunately for the irrepressible sons of the
Governor the Lady Arbella Johnson had mothered them from the
first day on shipboard. She was a sweet and gentle young woman
who deserved a far better fate than awaited her in New England.
Fortunately there was no foreknowledge of events to cloud the hap-
piness of Isaac Johnson and his lady. They too had been on deck
and like all the others were ravenously hungry when breakfast was
served on the morning of April ninth. After a brief and eloquent
prayer by the Rev. George Phillips the company settled merrily to
their morning repast.

In the midst of breakfast a sailor appeared in the doorway. From
his agitated countenance could readily have been seen that he bore
startling news. At a signal from Captain Milborne, the man hur-
ried to his side and whispered in the captain’s ear. Hastily excusing
himself the commander dashed from the saloon. All conversation
ceased. Presently the captain’s booming tones could be heard above
them, but the group in the breakfast saloon could make nothing of the
babel of shouts.

Thomas Dudley, who had followed the captain from the saloon,
now returned to report that the lookout on the masthead had espied a

514

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

fleet of eight ships astern of them bearing down in their direction.
The distance was then too great for certainty, but the close formation
in which the pursuers were sailing aroused suspicions that the ships
were war craft from Dunkirk. If so this would mean a bloody
encounter before the day ended.

With great eagerness and alarm, therefore, the passengers hur-
ried on deck, only to behold the blue expanse of ocean behind them,
with the ships of their own fleet gaily decked out with bellying sails
following in their wake. Captain Milborne grimly explained that the
sails of the other fleet were still below the horizon, yet in plain view
of the lookout at the masthead.

“Perhaps they will not see us at all,” suggested Lady Arbella
Johnson hopefully.

“My lady does not understand these matters,” responded the cap-
tain gravely, “but our sails are as plainly in view to their lookout as
theirs now are to our man up yonder. I was told in Yarmouth that
ten ships from Dunkirk were lying in wait for us and that is why I am
anxious to know the number.”

“Eight sail,” bawled the lookout. “I’ve counted them again, sir.”

“Aye, aye,” responded Captain Milborne. “Keep a sharp look-
out in all directions, but watch those eight ships every minute and see
if any more are hidden behind them.”

Signals were hoisted for the consorts of the “Arbella” to set every
inch of canvas that they could spread. The flagship might easily have
outsailed the others, but if a sea fight were to occur the little fleet must
present united resistance to the enemy. They must not separate.
Hope of outsailing the pursuers was soon abandoned. Within an
hour the tips of the sails of the eight ships were visible over the hori-
zon. It was positively fascinating to landsmen to witness this gradual
rising up over the ocean rim of sails of the mysterious pursuing fleet.

There was little time for idle conjecture. Captain Peter Mil-
borne was no sooner convinced that the strangers were gaining on
his little fleet than a signal was given to clear decks and to make ready
for possible hostilities. John Winthrop thus depicts the stirring
scenes on shipboard Friday, April 9, 1630:

“Our captain caused the gun room and gun deck to be cleared.
All the hammocks were taken down, our ordnance loaded, and our

515

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

powder chests and fireworks made ready, and our landmen quartered
among the seamen, and twenty-five of them appointed for muskets
and every man written down for his quarter.”

These ominous activities must have been thrilling indeed to eleven-
year-old Stephen Winthrop and his ten-year-old brother Adam. Small
boys have rarely been privileged to witness such scenes as these, nor
have ladies for that matter. By noontime the vigorous gale before
which the Puritan fleet had been driving slackened considerably.
Strangely enough the pursuing ships continued to enjoy the force of
the wind. This fact was clearly evident from their bellying sails and
their swift onward motion. The distance between pursuer and pur-
sued was lessening with alarming rapidity.

“Whereupon we all prepared to fight with them,” wrote Governor
Winthrop in his journal, “and took down some cabins which were in
the way of our ordnance, and out of every ship was thrown such bed
matters as were subject to take fire. We heaved out our long boats
and put up our waste cloths, and drew forth our men, and armed them
with muskets and other weapons, and instruments for fireworks. For
experiment our captain shot a fall of wild-fire fastened to an arrow
out of a cross bow, which burnt in the water a good time.”

It should be explained that in naval warfare in 1630 a sea fight
occurred at close range. These wooden ships were so manoeuvred
that they could rake each other’s decks with musket shot. The can-
non of that period could not make direct hits unless very near to an
opposing vessel. The fireworks mentioned were inflammable mate-
rials set afire and thrown, or shot by means of arrows, into the waist
of the enemy ship. To seize and throw overboard these flaming mis-
siles was one of the necessary defensive measures of every ship’s crew.
But there was another feature of sea warfare that deserves mention.
Ships frequently endeavored to run alongside an enemy craft. Sailors
with incredible nimbleness would lash the ships together, whereupon
others would clamber fiercely onto the decks of the enemy and with
pikes, cutlasses and axes do battle with the defenders who would be
similarly armed. The unwieldly muskets, laboriously loaded through
the muzzle were utterly useless in hand-to-ihand fighting. This
explains why a large detail of the “Arbella’s” defenders were armed
with “other weapons” as Winthrop described them.

516

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

The noonday meal aboard the Puritan fleet this day must have
been more or less perfunctory. When men and women are facing
such an ocean drama of apparently relentless and successful pursuit,
with their own lives at hazard, the dinner table must inevitably lose
its wonted charm. The eight ships were by this time in plain view
astern, flying no flags but with spreading canvas gaining hour by hour
upon the “Arbella” and her consorts.

Immediately following dinner the order was given for women
and children to be removed to the lower decks that they might be
spared the greater danger of nearness to the gun decks that might be
riddled with enemy cannon shot or musket fire. Before this plan was
put into operation on the flagship, however, Governor Winthrop
caused the entire company, men, women and children, to assemble on
the upper deck for prayer. He records with obvious pride in his
journal that “not a woman or child showed fear, though all did appre-
hend the danger to have been great.” When prayers were over the
group dispersed below deck, all save the men who were to do the
fighting.

Governor Winthrop and such members of his official staff as were
aboard the “Arbella” now gathered around the stout-hearted Eng-
lish captain.

“How far distant, Master Milborne, be yonder ships?” inquired
Governor Winthrop, gazing steadfastly at the pursuing fleet.

“Not more than a league from us now,” returned the captain
grimly. “They sail more easily in this light breeze than we do for we
are more heavily laden than they.”

“When think you they will overtake us, Master Milborne?” asked
Sir Richard Saltonstall.

“At this rate they will surely overhaul us by late afternoon.”

“Is anything to be gained by delay — are there English war craft
that might aid us?”

“Most improbable, Sir Richard.”

“Then why do we delay?” cried John Winthrop. “If fight we
must why weary ourselves with anxiety ere we join battle.”

“That is my thought also, Master Winthrop, and if this breeze
does not change within the hour I propose to meet these ships. If
they be friends, all will be well. If they be enemies, as seems most
likely, we may at least fight for our lives by daylight.”

517

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

To this plan Winthrop and his advisers gave instant approval.
Signals were flown. The “Arbella” slackened sail. One by one in
turn her consorts came abreast of her for a brief conference with
Captain Peter Milborne, then drifted past — at an agreed signal, all
four ships tacked and swung about in martial array, heading straight
for their pursuers.

Now that the die had been cast, Captain Peter Milborne was in
high feather. “This will show that we are not afraid,” he exulted,
as the distance lessened. “And do you see the commotion on yonder
ships? Why the rascals are not ready for us, after all! They are
uncovering their guns in great haste.”

By this time the Puritan fleet had run up their flags. No sooner
did the banners of England break from their mastheads, than a great
shout came over the water from the supposed enemy fleet. One after
another from the color mast of the eight ships came the familiar
emblem of Old England, whereupon from the decks of the “Arbella,”
the “Talbot,” the “Ambrose,” the “Jewel” went up such a mighty
chorus of shouting as none but men who have long labored under
excitement can well voice. For a full five minutes it seemed that the
ocean itself had burst into a frenzy of cheers.

Women and children came swarming up from the close quarters in
which they had been confined, laughing and crying in excess of pent-up
emotion. Every ship, as they met, saluted each other by discharging
the weapons that were now so unnecessary. The entire fleet presently
made ready to continue the journey to America, but they immediately
espied two fishing vessels busily engaged at their calling nearby.
Winthrop writes that every ship of his group sent out a boat to the
fishermen and “bought of them great store of fresh fish of divers
sorts.”

What a celebration the Puritan host must have held that night
at supper time! Fish could never have tasted sweeter than on that
day of deliverance from a danger that did not really exist, but which
had seemed as real to them for many hours as though all the “Dun-
kirkers” on the English Channel had been bearing down upon them.
John Winthrop made a highly applauded speech that evening at sun-
set in which he took occasion to praise the captain, the crew of the
“Arbella,” the men of his own colony and the women and children, all
of whom had behaved with fearless composure.

518

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Three days later the Winthrop fleet had cleared the English Chan-
nel and was launched on its great ocean journey. The rolling and
tossing of the ships now occasioned a great deal of distress to those
who were at all susceptible to sickness at sea. Even the Rev. George
Phillips became sorely afflicted and Winthrop mades record that on
Sunday, April n, 1630, there were no church services, or at least no
sermons aboard the “Arbella” because their clergy were unable to
preach.

On the following day the captain of the flagship caused a rope to
be stretched from the steerage to the main mast, at such a level that
even children might reach it. Winthrop thus picturesquely describes
the use to which this rope was put. “Our children and others who
lay groaning in the cabins,” he writes, “we fetched out .... (and)
made them stand some on one side and some on the other and sway it
up and down until they were warm, and by this means they soon grew
well and merry.”

Two days later they had occasion to resort to the same plan. A
stiff gale was rolling up mountainous waves, on which their ships
heaved and set in a manner truly disconcerting even to the best sailors
on board. Toward night the seamen of the “Arbella” were obliged
to furl some of their canvas in order not to outdistance the other ships
of the fleet. On Thursday, April fifteenth, at ten o’clock at night a
great storm of rain set in with wind that approached hurricane
strength and violence. Taken unawares Captain Milborne rushed on
deck and gave hurried orders to furl the sails. Mariners swarmed
aloft to haul in the topsail. Others lowered the foresail and mainsail,
which tasks were accomplished after such a battle with the elements
as the hardy sailors of the “Arbella” had rarely experienced. The
task of furling the mainsail, however, was quite beyond their com-
bined strength. A mighty wind that shrieked like all the demons of
the pit, flung and tossed and shook the heavy canvas. It thrashed
the deck and rigging, bowling men over like ninepins, and awakening
every sleeping passenger below decks. It is hard to say what might
have been the issue of this mighty contest had not the sail fabric sud-
denly surrendered to the might of the storm. The torn canvas, now
in the full fury of the wind beat itself to shreds while mighty surges
swept the deck of the “Arbella.” When the tempest had abated,
after more than six hours, the giant surges into which the heaving

519

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

ocean had become furrowed, presented, in the early morning watch,
a spectacle that was truly awe-inspiring. The ship was no longer in
danger, but the rhythmic upswing and the breadth-taking descent, as
mountain and valley of green water succeeded each other, was an
experience long to be remembered by every soul on board.

Two of the “ArbellaV” companions, the “Ambrose” and the
“Jewel,” were still in sight when daylight came, but wallowing heavily.
The “Talbot” had disappeared. Governor John Winthrop had now
learned that his son, Henry, had embarked on the “Talbot” when the
three ships had fallen back from the roadstead at Cowes as previously
related. Possibly the young man had feared his father’s displeasure,
for there had surely been opportunity, after the fiasco of the sup-
posed “Dunkirkers” pursuit had been solved, for Henry Winthrop to
have transferred to the “Arbella” from the “Talbot” if he had so
desired. He chose instead to remain on the “Talbot” for the rest of
the voyage, which fact was indirectly to contribute to the tragedy that
later terminated his life.

The loss of the mainsail of the “Arbella” was not so great a
calamity as it might have been owing to the fact that every properly
equipped sailing ship customarily went to sea provided with extra
sails and canvas. The mariners had immediately busied themselves
at the task of getting out of storage a new mainsail and of installing
it in place of the storm-shattered wreck of the former sail. The
weather was extremely cold for April, with a piercing wind that
chilled one to the marrow. Winthrop made a special note of this fact
in his journal on April 19, 1630, in the following language:

“All this time since we came from the Isle of Wight we had cold
weather, so that we could well endure our warmest clothes. I wish
therefore that all such as shall pass this way in the spring have a care
to provide warm clothing; for nothing breeds more trouble and dan-
ger of sickness, in this season, than cold.”

The Puritan ships, like all sailing craft, were subject to whims
of the wind. No man could foresee when air currents would prosper
or hinder their progress, neither could he have foreknowledge of
when mighty storms might bear down upon them. The best that
mariners could have done under the circumstances was unquestion-
ably performed by those in charge of the “Arbella” and her con-

520

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

sorts. On April twenty-ninth John Winthrop made the following
rueful comment in his journal:

“We have been now three weeks at sea, and have not come above
three hundred leagues, being about one-third part of our way.”

The “Talbot” had never appeared on the horizon since the great
storm. Nothing was known of her fate. On Saturday, the first day
of May, came another storm with mighty winds and fierce showers of
rain. Since the gale was from the southwest the ships were obliged to
furl their sails and strive to keep from being blown off their course.
When morning dawned on the second day of the storm the “Arbella”
was alone. Night and the storm had so far separated her from her
companions that nothing could be seen in any direction save the end-
less waste of storm-tossed ocean. Yet the travelers had now so far
accustomed themselves to life on the mighty deep that the Sabbath
day was observed with all proper ceremony.

“The sea raged and tossed us exceedingly,” writes John Win-
throp, “yet through God’s mercy we were very comfortable, and few
or none sick, but had opportunity to keep the Sabbath and Mr. Phillips
preached twice that day.”

A circumstance that comforted the company aboard the “Arbella”
exceedingly was that during the day the “Ambrose” and the “Jewel”
again hove in sight, thus giving assurance that they had not foundered
during the storm. On the following day, May third, in the early
morning the storm abated rapidly and it was soon possible to hoist
sails and to resume the interrupted journey.

A glimpse of human nature is afforded now and then by the Gov-
ernor’s prosaic daily record of events. On Monday, May 3, 1630, he
writes that a maid-servant in the ship who was suffering at the time
from sea sickness drank “strong water” as an antidote for the malady.
She indulged so freely in the supposed remedy that she became not
only dead drunk but she remained unconscious for many hours. Fears
were entertained lest she might die from alcoholic poisoning. The
entry of this incident in his journal led the worthy Governor to indulge
in a bit of moralizing, in which he voiced the complaint, as old as man-
kind itself — the supposed decadence of the younger generation.

“We have observed it a common fault in our young people,”
he writes, “that they gave themselves to drink hot waters very
immoderately.”

521

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

It is apparent therefore that the presence of a plentiful cargo
of intoxicants on shipboard was proving a fatal lure to the younger
generation, chafing from inactivity and perhaps from an excessive
program of religion. Daily sermons, and two for good measure on
the Sabbath day, with a general catechism on Tuesdays and Wednes-
days, rendered the Puritan fleet during its long weeks at sea a veritable
camp meeting from which there was no escape for old or for young.

In addition to the lamentable tendency to overindulge in intoxi-
cating liquor, weeks of close confinement on shipboard had caused
some of the passengers to develop animosities toward one another
that resulted more than once during the voyage in fistic encounters.
It became necessary to make an example of “fighters,” as they were
picturesquely termed by Governor Winthrop. On the very day of the
maid-servant’s misadventure Winthrop sets down in his journal the
following terse entry:

“We set two fighters in the bolts, till night, with their hands
bound behind them.”

Thus the days passed. The ships frequently encountered adverse
winds, thereby losing much of their previous gains, since to drift for
days before a gale, even when sails were furled, could accomplish
much mischief to their main purpose of reaching New England. On
the night of May tenth, as the ships were running before a south by
southwest gale, signals of distress were suddenly seen aboard the
“Ambrose,” causing instant alarm on the flagship.

Governor Winthrop and Captain Milborne were roused from
sleep. It was then midnight and a great tempest of wind was rolling
up giant surges, in which the three ships of the fleet were so tossed
and thrown about that their signal lights appeared on high and dis-
appeared into the depths with dizzying irregularity.

“I see no trouble, Master Milborne,” shouted Governor Win-
throp above the storm that shrieked through the rigging, “the
‘Ambrose’ is sailing, even as we are.”

“Aye, aye, she is sailing true enough, but see you not two lights
where only one has been before? That is our signal of a ship in dis-
tress. What it means I know not. We have set two lights to let
them know that we will try to aid them.”

“But what can be done in such a raging sea? No man can cross
from ship to ship lest he drown or be dashed in pieces against the
planking.”

522

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

True enough, but we must know the plight of yonder craft and
so we are swinging the ‘Arbella’ into line with her course that she
may run close to us — a risky business I well know, but it must
needs be.”

By this time the chief men of Governor Winthrop’s official fam-
ily were on deck, bundled grotesquely against the bitter cold of the
storm and wind. Tense with anxiety they witnessed the skillful
manoeuvring of their own ship by which it was made to run into the
same line of sailing as the “Ambrose” and slightly ahead of her.
Sails were slackened that the ship in distress might run as near as
possible alongside. The grave peril involved in such a proceeding,
in the midst of the storm, was keenly apparent to the anxious group
on the deck of the “Arbella.” With trumpets to lips the captains of
the two ships bellowed across at each other. The “Ambrose” had
broken some of her shrouds, or standing rigging, thus rendering it
unsafe to bear as much sail as her sister ships. To make matters
grave indeed the mighty tossings of the storm had so strained the
ship s timbers that the “Ambrose” had sprung a leak, and dared not
be left alone.

For two anxious hours the “Arbella” so trimmed her sails as to
keep abreast of her sister ship, while aboard the “Ambrose” sailors
labored mightily at the task of mending the broken shrouds, while
others manned the pumps. Winthrop writes: “Our Captain went

not to rest till four of the clock, and some others of us slept but lit-
tle that night.” Before returning to their cabins, however, Win-
throp and his party had the great satisfaction of a signal from the
“Ambrose” that her rigging had been made fast again. She filled her
sails and moved on at full speed once more.

For Tuesday, May n, 1630, John Winthrop made the following
entry in his journal :

The storm continued all this day, till three in the afternoon, and
the sea went very high, so that our ship could make no way, being
aWe to bear no more than our mainsail about midmast high. At
three there fell a great storm of rain which laid the wind, and the
wind shifting into the west, we tacked and stood into the head sea, to
avoid the rolling of our ship, and by that means we made no way, the
sea beating us back as much as the wind put us forward. We still
had cold weather. Our people were so acquainted with storms that
they were not sick, nor troubled, though they were much tossed forty-

523

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

eight hours together, viz., twenty-four during the storm and as long
as the next night and day following, Wednesday, 12, when we lay as it
were a-hull for want of wind, and rolling continually in a high-grown
sea. This day was close and rainy.

It was too much to expect that weeks on shipboard could have
been passed without some friction developing between crew and pas-
sengers. It will be remembered that the government of the Colony
was being carried on during the voyage. The captain of the “Arbella”
therefore discreetly left the disciplining of refractory passengers to
Governor Winthrop and his advisers. As for disciplining the crew
of the flagship, that was a matter entirely within the province of the
captain himself. Governor Winthrop now appears in a new light.

It seems that one of the mariners aboard the “Arbella,” a petty
officer, had wilfully injured one of the passengers. Complaint was
made to Captain Milborne, who at once summoned the culprit before
him. Having heard the testimony of the accuser and of witnesses,
the captain found the officer guilty and commanded that he be tied
up by the hands. This punishment would have been painful enough
in any event, but Captain Milborne, acting under the stern if not
savage code of sea captains of the period, commanded that a heavy
weight be hanged about the culprit’s neck. Winthrop, as we have
previously noted, had before now sentenced men to be bound hand and
foot and left in this painful posture for hours at a time, but the spec-
tacle of one of the officers of the “Arbella” enduring so grievous a
punishment touched him with compassion. He accordingly sought a
private conference with the stern commander of the flagship.

“Master Milborne, I humbly crave your pardon if I may be thought
to intrude on your proper authority, but when I brought you complaint
against yonder wretch we had no wish that he be punished so
grievously.”

“Grievous offenses deserve grievous punishments,” grumbled Cap-
tain Milborne. “That one of my own officers should have committed
such a trespass against a passenger of this ship shames me deeply.”

“I can well understand your feelings, Master Milborne, but we
must not overlook the provocation and the storm that puts men out
of sorts.”

“Neither provocation nor storm can excuse an officer of an Eng-
lish ship for forgetting his proper duty to those in his care.”

524

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“I will not gainsay you in that, Master Milborne, but since one of
my own men be the cause of the trouble I am come to implore you to
lighten the punishment of the man.”

“Discipline aboard ship, Master Winthrop, demands rigorous
dealing with culprits.”

Thus the argument continued, Captain Milborne contending for
the justice of his action with all the stubbornness for which English
sea captains were famous. In the end, however, Governor Winthrop
persuaded him that if the punishment were continued there would be
danger that the crew develop a hostility to the passengers because of
it. The captain soon set the culprit free, thus restoring harmony on
shipboard.

525

CHAPTER XXVIII

The Winthrop Company Reach New England

The month of May, 1630, was spent in much the same struggle
with winds and sudden storms that we have observed in the early
weeks of the voyage. Doggedly the three ships fought their way
toward the American coast. On June second, in the evening, a great
fog enveloped them. The captain was now convinced that the ships
were in the near vicinity of land. Sounding leads were tried in vain
during the fog of that day and the next, but in the afternoon of the
second day the lead touched ground at eighty fathoms. The course
was thereupon changed to the southeast.

On June fourth they had the extraordinary experience of sailing
through a thick fog while the sun shone brightly overhead. Win-
throp declares that the fog was so very dense that they could not see
a stone’s throw ahead of them. Every two hours they sounded but
their lead could not touch bottom. So distressed had the travelers
become at this endless blind sailing in fog that the Governor pro-
claimed a day of fasting and prayer which was solemnly observed.
As if in answer to their appeal the wind changed at four o’clock next
morning. When the passengers came on deck at an early hour they
were rejoiced to behold the heaving ocean once more spread out to
the horizon line all around them, unclouded by fog. Although it was
raining the spirits of all the company had so revived that a thanksgiv-
ing service was held in the main cabin of the “Arbella.”

Sunday came and fog once more; but at mid-afternoon the mist
parted and to the north of them, about five or six leagues distant, they
beheld the marvelous spectacle of land. To men and women who
had so long been denied the sight of the solid earth, eight weeks on
the ocean, their tiny sailing ship a virtual plaything of wind and
wave, this promise of once more setting foot on dry land was a cause
for wild rejoicing.

John Winthrop rushed at once to Captain Milborne’s station on
the topmost deck.

“What land be this, Master Milborne?” he demanded eagerly.

“Our chart indicates, Master Winthrop, that yonder shore is what

52 6

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

we call Cape Sable, the southernmost point of the land granted to Sir
William Alexander by the late King. Men call it Nova Scotia or New
Scotland.”

“Is it near Cape Ann?”

“No, Master Winthrop, for distances be great on this coast, yet
with fair sailing we should land your company within a week’s time.”
Sir Richard Saltonstall, Thomas Dudley, Isaac Johnson and
others now joined them, but the conference was of short duration
because the eager throng on deck deserved attention. Governor Win-
throp therefore hurried to a vantage point where he might be seen
and heard by all. When he raised his hands in a gesture for silence
the murmur of rejoicing was instantly hushed.

“The Lord has fulfilled His promise,” he declared, his face shin-
ing with gladness, “for yonder lies the Promised Land, yet you must
needs realize that this land to which we are come is a vast land, as
much greater than England as England is greater than the Isle of
Wight. It will be days before we can hope to reach Cape Ann. There
lies before us a great gulf that we must cross. Captain Milborne is
minded to steer for Agamenticus where Sir Ferdinando Gorges has
planted a colony, from thence to follow the coast to Cape Ann.”

The gladness of the hour and the surge of religious emotion
instinctively called forth by the sight of the New World, caused the
impromptu meeting to drift into a fervent religious service in which
the Reverend George Phillips gave voice to the unspoken thoughts of
all. The passengers aboard the “Arbella” had been exceedingly
fortunate throughout the long voyage, since in Winthrop’s journal we
find no mention of deaths on the flagship, although two servants had
died on the “Ambrose,” as well as one seaman on the “Jewel.” They
were later to learn that there had been many deaths on the “Talbot.”
This service of thanksgiving had no sooner concluded than the
breeze before which they had been running subsided and the pestifer-
ous fog again blotted out the sight of land. It soon developed that
a change of wind was in the making. Before long it sprang up again
from the southeast. The “Arbella” tacked and set its course to the
northwest, thus continuing all that night. The next morning at day-
break the sounding lead disclosed only thirty fathoms of water. To
a practical seaman like Captain Peter Milborne the shallowness
of the ocean depth suggested one thing — a sorely needed commodity

527

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

— fish. If they were indeed over a fishing bank, and there were
known to be many in this region of the Atlantic coast, the “Arbella”
might now restock its depleted larder, for the supply of salt fish had
been exhausted.

The sails of the flagship were accordingly furled. When early
rising passengers ventured on deck at sunrise June 7, 1630, they
beheld the joyful spectacle of eager sailors busy with hook and line,
and busy to a purpose for they were hauling in codfish of mammoth
size. Governor Winthrop declares in his journal that in less than two
hours, with but a few hooks overboard, the mariners captured sixty-
seven codfish. “Most of them very great fish,” he writes, “some a
yard and a half long and a yard in compass.” Modern fishermen
along the New England coast may well sigh with envy at this record
of codfish four and a half feet long!

The worthy Governor indicated in his journal his gratitude for
this bounty of the deep and of its appropriateness, since it came on
a Monday, one of the days when all on shipboard were scheduled to
eat fish. Having made their catch the mariners swarmed aloft into
the rigging. The sails of the “Arbella” were again set. The ship
resumed its voyage across the gulf of Maine. A circumstance that
worried the Governor not a little was the fact that during the trouble-
some days of fog the flagship had parted with her companions and
was now apparently alone on the ocean. Not a sail was in sight. The
air was bitter cold.

By mid-forenoon the sounding lead disclosed another shallow
place in the ocean. Again the sails were furled and again the eager
mariners, in spite of numb fingers and slippery decks, resumed their
fishing tackle with much the same result as before. The sea bottom
was apparently alive with mammoth codfish. The Governor makes
record that all the company feasted on fish that day.

On Tuesday the eighth of June, 1630, the “Arbella” kept on
in a northwesterly course. The weather continued extremely cold.
Early in the afternoon the lookout reported a mountain peak ahead
of them. For a time it was thought that they were approaching Mon-
hegan Island. With great eagerness the passengers crowded on deck
to witness the spectacle of a great mountain rising over the ocean
horizon. Higher and higher with other peaks surrounding it, rose

528

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

the eminence toward which they were steering. Blue in the distance
no longer, but with the vivid green of spring verdure except on its
stone-crested heights, a great island uplifted itself before them.

Even as they gazed the passengers were aware of a pleasing
change in the atmosphere around them. The arctic wind from the
north had lost its power and all the air gradually became warm and
pleasant. By three o’clock in the afternoon Captain Milborne had
decided that the island was what is now known as Mount Desert
Island off the coast of eastern Maine. Captain Milborne accordingly
turned the prow of the flagship west by southwest, and was soon
merrily sailing down the coast. The ship’s course was near enough
to the forest-clad mainland to awaken in the hearts of all the sweet
nostalgia that inevitably disturbs landsmen when completing a long
ocean voyage.

The afternoon sun shone upon them in all its brilliance. The air
continued warm and balmy. It was one of those June days in which
spring and summer seemed to join hands and dance, stirring leaf and
blossom, and, laden with nectar, flitting joyously across the shimmer-
ing water to the nostrils of those who have long dreamed of land and
the fragrance of flowers. To Governor John Winthrop and his
fellow-passengers, crowding the rails of the little flagship, this swift
transit from winter into summer was well nigh overpowering. Not
even the memory of green fields and countrysides of Old England
could match the reality of this new land. Winthrop writes in his
journal: “We now had fair sunshiny weather, and so pleasant a

sweet air as did much refresh us, and there came a smell off the shore
like the smell of a garden.” What a world of eloquence there lives
in that last expression, “the smell of a garden,” for it mirrors so
clearly the reaction of home-loving Englishmen to the perfume of
trees and flowers. Suddenly, to the solitary ship, as though the New
World were sending winged messengers of welcome, came a wild
pigeon and a small land bird, fearlessly alighting in the rigging of
the “Arbella.”

Thus the flagship of the Puritan fleet pursued its solitary way,
heading into its first American sunset, sailing on in twilight and under
the stars, sailing all the night in a southwesterly course parallel to
the mainland. When morning came the travelers were rejoiced to
see the long horizon line of green hills on their starboard side. The

529

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

captain of the “Arbella” well knew the indented coast line and the
wooded islands of the region, so he wisely kept his distance from the
mainland. Winthrop states that they were sailing eight or ten leagues
off shore. He describes the mainland as “very high land, lying in
many hills, very unequal.” He comments also upon the numerous
small islands that were visible from the ship.

It is somewhat difficult to determine from Winthrop’s journal the
exact course of the “Arbella” as it sailed down the coast. On Thurs-
day, June tenth, he states that they lost all sight of land which would
indicate that they were then opposite the great indentation known as
Casco Bay. Their course being south by southwest would naturally
cause them to approach land again in the vicinity of York, or Aga-
menticus, as the Gorges Plantation was then known. Sure enough, at
four o’clock that afternoon they beheld land on their starboard bow
which the Governor describes as “the Three Turk’s Heads, being a
ridge of three hills upon the mainland whereof the southernmost is
greatest. It lies near Agamenticus.” He states moreover that to the
north of them they also beheld another hill which lies near Cape Por-
poise, in the present town of Kennebunkport, Maine.

The voyagers had no intention of landing in Sir Ferdinando
Gorges’ territory. Having established their bearings they continued
down the coast. In the late afternoon they were sailing so close to
the shore that the passengers were afforded a clear view of giant
trees that extended in places down to the very shore line. Again the
passengers because of their nearness to land were refreshed by wood-
land odors. Night coming on, the prudent captain dared not continue
so near to the mainland. The “Arbella” accordingly tacked to the
southeast and with a smart gale behind her was soon a goodly dis-
tance off shore.

On the following day, when they approached the Isles of Shoals,
they beheld a sight that gladdened their hearts, having so long been
without a sign of human life. A ship lay there at anchor and five
or six shallops were under sail in the vicinity. The “Arbella’s” fish
supply had again run low. When shoals of mackerel were encoun-
tered the mariners joyfully undertook the task of capturing a great
quantity of this delicious variety of food fish. While they were
engaged at their absorbing task a shallop approached and hailed
them. The craft belonged to some English fishermen then operating
in the vicinity.

530

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

Throughout the day, June n, 1630, the “Arbella” had been in
sight of a headland that Captain Milborne had assured the eager
passengers could be none other than Cape Ann. They knew that
scarce fifteen miles beyond the Cape lay the Puritan settlement
founded by the Massachusetts Bay Company. In the forenoon the
headland had been a tiny blue promontory on the southwestern hori-
zon. Hour by hour it had grown in size, the blue haze changing to
definite outlines that reared themselves higher and higher above the
ocean rim.

As sunset threw its golden mantle over the distant hills of the
mainland, lying in a great half-circle to the north and west of them,
the whole company gathered on deck for a service of thanksgiving
because they were so near their journey’s end. When prayers were
ended every eye instinctively turned toward the bold headland of
Cape Ann. In silence on the “Arbella’s” forward deck, with the
scent of far off woodlands in their nostrils and the warm summer
breeze playing about them, they stood in reverential awe under the
kindling stars of the June evening. Beyond the promontory of Cape
Ann, still outlined against the sky ahead of them, lay all their future
hopes and fears. Tomorrow they would see their friends and dis-
cover what had happened in the interval since the previous September
when letters had last come to them from America.

All night long the flagship pushed steadily down the coast until at
the first flush of dawn the eager captain realized that they were oppo-
site the mouth of the little bay in which the harbor of Naumkeag or
Salem was located. It was then four o’clock in the morning of Sat-
urday, June twelfth (or rather, June twenty-second, by our calendar).
There was much to be done before nightfall, for the Lord’s Day was
at hand when all labors must cease. Early as was the hour Captain
Milborne caused two cannon to be fired as a signal that the “Arbella”
had arrived and was waiting to undertake the difficult passage through
the narrow channel to a safe anchorage. He did not stand upon cere-
mony, however, for he immediately dispatched a skiff to a ship that
lay at anchor in the harbor, the “Lion” which had sailed from Bristol
weeks before the setting forth of the “Arbella,” and had reached
Salem in the latter part of May, 1630. The “Lion,” be it known,
had brought over a group of Leyden Pilgrims for Plymouth Planta-

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

tion, their passage having been arranged for by Isaac Allerton, who
had accompanied them to America.

While the “Arbella” was awaiting the proper condition of tide,
perhaps an hour after their signal gun had been fired, a shallop was
observed approaching the ship. It did not require the joyful “ship
ahoy” from the lusty lungs of the occupants of the shallop to bring
the passengers crowding to the rails of the flagship. A great event
was impending. They were to receive their first visitor in American
waters. The occupants of the smaller craft, at a safe distance from
the lazily swinging ship, dropped sail and cast anchor. A man there-
upon clambered into a skiff and rowed swiftly to the ship’s side. As
the visitor came up the ladder to the deck of the flagship Captain Mil-
borne greeted him with joyful acclaim.

“Master Isaac Allerton, of Plymouth Plantation,” he cried.

“Even so, Master Milborne, and right glad to bring you the greet-
ings of our brethren at New Plymouth. By a happy chance I am sail-
ing up the coast to Pemaquid, but I cannot deny myself the pleasure
of being first to greet our new neighbors. Aha ! Master Winthrop, I
trust that you are well !”

The two men clasped hands with great cordiality. In fact the
chief men of the Massachusetts Bay Company were now on hand to
greet Allerton, who had met them in London months before during
negotiations for the booking of passage of the Leyden Pilgrims.
Conversation eagerly turned to the voyage of the “Lion” and to
Allerton’s experience thereon as a passenger. Since this ship had
been the first to reach the Endicott Colony, bearing letters from the
Massachusetts Bay Company announcing the change in government,
John Winthrop was frankly solicitous to learn what reception the
news may have received in the plantation.

“To speak truly, Master Winthrop, there are those yonder in
Salem as the plantation is now called, who know you not but who
nevertheless rejoice at your coming.”

“You are pleased to speak in riddles, good sir.”

“Nay, not in riddles to those who know Master Endicott as
Governor.”

“So you think that even a stranger would be welcome,” nodded
the Governor, a twinkle in his eyes. “If that be the case then my
task will surely be easier. But tell me, how does Master Endicott
take the news?”

532

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“With true Christian fortitude, Master Winthrop. I had mis-
judged the man for I had fancied that the plantation would be rent
asunder by his rage at being rejected as chief ruler. The “Lion”
had been in port scarce twenty-four hours ere he had called a meeting
of the planters to read to them the news of your selection and to
pledge his own allegiance to the new government.”

“You could not have brought me better news, Master Allerton.
The man is worthy of trust and shall not suffer because of my com-
ing. Tell me, how is it with the plantation?”

“As to that, Master Winthrop, you had best inquire of Master
Endicott, who will no doubt see you this day. From all that I can
learn things are gravely amiss over yonder. There has been much
sickness and many deaths among the planters and their families. To
what extent I know not, but the plantation is in sore distress.”

Shortly after Isaac Allerton had taken his leave Captain Milborne
decided that wind and tide were favorable to attempt the passage of
the narrow strait between Baker’s Island and another which Win-
throp writes down as “Little Isle.” While the “Arbella” was in
motion and headed into the channel, a shallop was observed emerging
from the harbor. Perceiving that the smaller craft was heading
toward the ship, the mariners with the more confidence gave the flag-
ship additional sail and advanced to meet the newcomer. When she
had reached the safety of the lee side of Baker’s Island the “Arbella”
was again anchored.

The shallop now arrived. It had as its chief passenger Captain
Peirce, the master of the good ship “Lion.” His coming was the sig-
nal for another joyful reunion on the deck of the “Arbella,” with
much handshaking and exchanging of greetings. It seems that Cap-
tain Peirce had been appointed by Governor Endicott as a committee
of one to welcome Governor Winthrop and his party to Salem harbor
and to arrange for a ceremonious visit to the “Arbella” of the resident
Governor and his staff.

Little additional information concerning affairs in the Colony was
derived from Captain Peirce, who soon took his leave, promising to
return early in the afternoon with Endicott and his staff. In the
meantime the eager passengers chafed mightily under the necessity
of delay in going ashore. Confined for many weeks on shipboard,
they were now in the near vicinity of land. Its green trees and sum-

533

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

mer verdure beckoned them. The very air was fragrant with the
breath of vast woodlands. Small wonder, therefore, that Governor
Winthrop had difficulty in restraining the impatience of his followers.

“Why should they not go ashore?” urged Thomas Dudley at an
impromptu meeting in the Governor’s cabin. “We have traveled
these many weeks for the privilege of setting foot on the soil of this
New World. I like not idle ceremony.”

“Nor do I,” returned John Winthrop evenly, “but we must
remember the unusual circumstances under which we come and have
a care lest we seem to override the wishes of the resident Governor.”
“Master Winthrop is right,” declared Sir Richard Saltonstall
heartily. “It is highly important that there be no seeming discourtesy
to the present government of the plantation. Until we land and take
over the administration of affairs John Endicott and his advisers are
entitled to be treated as the rulers of our Colony at Salem.”

“I grant the point Sir Richard, but can we not give these poor
souls leave to go ashore at some other place than the settlement itself.
Surely it could not be deemed disrespectful to Master Endicott’s
authority if they be set ashore on the mainland opposite our present
anchorage.”

The outcome of the conference was a decision to permit such of
the passengers as desired the privilege to go ashore directly after
dinner. The weather was warm and balmy as though Heaven itself
had ordained that the first day of the voyagers in their new dominions
should be well nigh perfect. The first boat load of excited humanity
had scarcely put off from the “Arbella” that afternoon than a shallop
was seen approaching from the inner harbor. Governor Winthrop at
once summoned the chief men of the Bay Company to assemble for a
formal reception of the visiting dignitaries, which he had every reason
to believe the approaching shallop contained.

Winthrop had never met John Endicott, but he now had no dif-
ficulty in singling him out from among those who approached the flag-
ship. Up the ship’s ladder presently came four men. John Winthrop and
his party were awaiting them on the main deck of the “Arbella.”
Captain Peirce acted as master of ceremonies in the official meeting
of Endicott and Winthrop. As the two men clasped hands and for
a moment took the measure of one another, there was indeed a

534

THREE CENTURIES AFTERWARD.

(Above) COPLEY SQUARE, SHOWING PUBLIC LIBRARY; (Below) PUBLIC GARDENS, BOSTON

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

marked contrast in their outward appearance. The blunt John Endi-
cott with stern, heavy-jowled features, his thin mustache and goatee,
was greeting for the first time his patrician successor. John Win-
throp was a man whose face was long and narrow and whose
mustache, Van Dyke beard and length of hair betokened the artist
and the thinker rather than the man of virile deeds. Here perhaps
was the secret of their dissimilarity. Each was slightly past forty
years of age, and life had set its indelible seal upon them, the one
harsh, violent, fanatical, and the other, the lawyer, the diplomat, the
man of wisdom.

Governor Endicott now presented to his superior the Reverend
Samuel Skelton and a Captain Levett. When introductions had been
completed on both sides Endicott lost no time in extending a formal
invitation to Winthrop and his party to accompany him at once to the
settlement.

“I acknowledge myself much bound to the Bay Company for the
honors that it has seen fit to bestow upon me,” he declared with great
solemnity, “and it grieves me much that I cannot offer you the hospi-
tality due to your rank and stations.”

“My dear brother in the Lord, we are not come to be entertained
nor to be ministered unto. Right gladly will we accompany you to
the settlement, but you must not feel that we expect feasting or good
cheer.”

“Nevertheless such as we have is freely to be yours, and we have
a house builded for your use should you choose to accept of it.”

“Come, come, Master Endicott, your generous zeal quite over-
whelms me, but let us go at once into the shallop for I am impatient
to see your town.”

In allotting space in the modest craft it was decided to invite Lady
Arbella Johnson and a few of her intimate friends to accompany the
party. Some of the group were ferried across to the waiting shallop ;
others embarked for the shore trip in the ship’s long boat. It was
indeed a merry party as they made their way across the four miles of
water that separated the “Arbella” from the town landing of Salem.
It could not equal in joyous abandon, however, those other boat loads
of passengers now being set ashore on the mainland opposite the
ship’s anchorage. Phillips, in his “Salem in the Seventeenth Cen-
tury,” published in 1933, declares that the probable site of their land-

535

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

ing is what is now known as Hospital Point in the town of Beverly.

The significant event of their trip to the mainland was recorded
by the worthy Governor in his famous journal thus: “In the mean-

time most of our people went on shore upon the land of Cape Ann,
which lay very near us, and gathered store of fine strawberries.”
Could one imagine a more delightful reception than this unexpected
gift of the wilds, the luscious and delicate strawberry? Had they
found merely enough for each to have sampled their piquant flavor
the discovery would have been prophetic indeed, but Governor Win-
throp declares that they “gathered store of fine strawberries,” wdiich
proves beyond question that they picked so great a quantity that they
brought back to the ship a store of them for their table. To any-
one who lives in New England such a find of wild strawberries,
except in cultivated fields, or burned land, would be regarded as
miraculous. These newly-arrived passengers were not roaming in
fields tilled by Englishmen, nor cleared by fire, but on an apparently
wild shore — and lo ! it was red with strawberries. Only once in the
author’s experience in the wilds has he ever beheld any such phenome-
non of nature. Returning from a fishing trip in eastern Maine many
years ago, faint from hunger, he beheld across a woodland river, a
bank red with wild strawberries. Crossing the river with his com-
panion, a college chum, they feasted on the largest wild strawberries
he had ever seen. They even filled a lunch basket with berries to be
carried home. The author can, therefore, glimpse, over the gulf of
three centuries, the true significance of John Winthrop’s entry in his
journal concerning the joyous discovery on the Beverly shore.

As for Winthrop and his party they, too, had partaken of the
bounty of nature in this new world. John Endicott had entertained
them at supper with venison from the forest. It was June, surely not
the best time of the year for such a feast. Unknown to the visitors
Endicott’s plantation was on the verge of famine, with but scant sup-
ply of provisions between them and utter want. Yet Endicott gal-
lantly provided venison pasty, or pies made of deer meat, washed
down with real beer — no doubt the last of his stock.

At sunset the Governor and the gentlemen of the party returned
to the “Arbella.” Some of the ladies remained at the settlement.
Two surprises awaited John Winthrop on his return to the flagship —
first, the strawberries as evidence of the products of nature in this

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

new world; and, secondly, a strange visitor who had boarded the
ship, an Indian brave from a nearby tribe. The natives had a keen
appreciation of the white man’s food and drink — especially the latter
— and the more venturesome had learned that a sure way to both,
was for the aforesaid native to be on hand to greet newcomers from
across the sea. Quite naturally the unbidden visitor who spoke only
a few words of broken English was unable to make himself under-
stood and fell back upon the primitive medium of sign language. The
Governor was constrained to show his friendliness by food and drink.

John Winthrop and his associates made much of the Indian,
regarding him as a sort of unofficial ambassador from the aboriginal
inhabitants. But the native soon became very much of a problem
to them, because when darkness came on he showed no disposition
to depart from the ship. At bedtime he was still sitting contentedly
in their midst .

Captain Milborne now came to the rescue. Lantern in hand he
escorted the Indian to a neatly folded sail in a sheltered place by the
mainmast. The captain rubbed his eyes and yawned elaborately, then
pointed to the sail, whereupon the savage, with every appearance of
gratitude, settled down for the night. The sail, thickly folded, was
no doubt softer than his usual couch, a grass mat laid over planks or
poles. The June night was conducive to slumber.

537

CHAPTER XXIX
Winthrop Explores the Bay

John Winthrop awakened at an early hour on the morning of
June thirteenth. He had learned disturbing facts during his visit to
the mainland on the previous afternoon. John Endicott had ruefully
admitted the impending famine for his Colony at Salem. Worse than
that, a great scourge of death had visited the little Colony. Thomas
Dudley, in a letter to the Countess of Lincoln, written a few months
after his coming to America, thus describes the deplorable conditions
at Salem: “We found the Colony in a sad and unexpected condition,
above eighty of them being dead the winter before; and many of
those alive weak and sick; all corn and bread amongst them hardly
sufficient to feed them a fortnight.”

It is no wonder that the newly arrived Governor should have
awakened in the early hours of the morning to ponder so great a
problem. The Salem Colony had now for two years been established
in this harbor, and yet it was so far from being self-supporting as to
require great expenditures from the Bay Company to keep it alive.
The problem of the servants of the Company who had been sent over
during the past two years was also a desperate one. In fact, the Gov-
ernor became so agitated that even though it was the Sabbath Day,
when secular affairs were supposed to be laid aside, he arranged an
informal conference with his deputy and assistants, Messrs. Dudley,
Saltonstall, Johnson, Coddington, Vassall and Bradstreet.

“I am greatly troubled in spirit,” he told them, “as to our proper
duty in this matter of the present plight of our plantation at this
place. So many have died here in recent months methinks it must be
an unhealthy place in which to live. We have come here with provi-
sions for the needs of our own passengers, but now it is clear that we
must share them with the planters already seated, lest they starve.”

“What if we starve as a consequence?”

“For that, Master Dudley, I cannot answer except that we must
needs take instant measures to send back to England for supplies. Is
it wise for us to settle at Salem at all? My idea is that we should

538

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

perhaps explore the coast and especially the Bay of Massachusetts,
where a small group of our people are already seated.”

“A capital idea,” rejoined Saltonstall, “and I for one believe that
it would simplify our problems greatly if we settled on new lands and
laid our own foundations.”

Isaac Johnson was the next to speak:

“The first comers have already taken whatsoever portions are
most valuable in this locality. Surely there are lands as good or bet-
ter in other places within our patent. Let us seek them out and spread
our newcomers over the most fertile acres we can discover.”

“There will be jealousies enough,” declared another of the group.
“Why invite trouble by seating ourselves near the planters who are
now in residence? Master Endicott may well prove a thorn in the
flesh.”

“As to that,” interposed John Winthrop, “I have no fears.
Know you not that he has already freely offered me the house in
which he lives for my residence as Governor, saying that it was built
for the Governor and that he is no longer Governor of this place ? I
have not accepted it and should be loath to dispossess him.”

The question of what should be done with reference to John Endi-
cott’s offer was wisely postponed to some future date, yet the matter
of the servants of the Company who were in grave need of food sup-
plies could not well be postponed. The Company had sent over in
two years’ time one hundred and eighty servants and had expended in
their equipment and transportation upwards of sixteen pounds upon
each of them. Many had died. There was little to show for all this
expense and now they were found to be on the edge of starvation.

“The chief problem of this plantation,” declared John Winthrop,
“is this matter of the hired servants of the Company, since they so
greatly outnumber the planters themselves. I doubt not that Master
Endicott has striven manfully to keep them at profitable tasks, but
I greatly fear that they have been a burden to the Company and are
like to be a sore trial to us.”

“Have they not planted crops and started gardens?” asked one
of the assistants.

“That indeed they have done, but it is a long time until harvest,
and they must be fed in the meantime.”

539

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“But we have no food to spare unless other ships bring the sup-
plies that were intended for the Company’s servants.”

The conference was interrupted at this point by one of the sailors
calling for Governor Winthrop. Masconomo, the Sagamore of Aga-
wam, with one of his followers, had paddled out to the “Arbella” to
pay respects to the new Governor. In halting and broken English
the Sagamore made known his good wishes and that of his followers
for the White Father who had arrived to govern the land. The
necessity of entertainment of the visitor kept the Governor busy until
the hour when the Sabbath-Day services were scheduled. A lengthy
sermon by the Rev. George Phillips was listened to with deep gravity
by Masonomo and the two Indian braves, for the visitor of the pre-
vious night was still on the “Arbella.” That the savages understood
scarcely a word of the lengthy discourse was apparently no cause for
restlessness on their part. With stoical composure they sat on the
ship’s deck near the Governor and his two sons throughout the
Sabbath-Day service stirring not at all until the noonday meal was
announced. This was their abundant reward.

The mid-day repast had no sooner been finished than word was
brought to Governor Winthrop that one of the missing consorts of
the “Arbella” had at last arrived off the harbor mouth. Captain
Milborne had already detailed a group of mariners to man a skiff
and send it forth to guide the ship into the roadstead where the
“Arbella” was now at anchor. It was the “Jewel.” After a great
deal of difficulty with wind and tide the ship managed to fight its way
into the outer harbor.

Salem harbor at that period had an excellent anchorage in its
inner harbor which was opposite the village itself. The great diffi-
culty encountered by sailing ships was the narrowness of the channel
in which adverse wind or tide made entrance under sail quite impos-
sible. When Monday morning dawned with the “Arbella” and the
“Jewel” still unable to make the passage in any other manner, the
mariners resorted to mechanical means. By transporting the anchor
by means of the long boat a full cable length down the channel before
dropping it overboard, it became possible, by means of the ship’s
windlass, to warp the craft down the channel. By repeating the
process they eventually attained an anchorage in the shelter of the
inner harbor. Thus the “Arbella” and the “Jewel” came to rest in

540

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

quiet waters. Early in the afternoon Governor Winthrop and nearly
all his Company went on shore. Captain Milborne, desirous of hon-
oring his distinguished passenger, fired a salute of five guns as the
Winthrop party left the ship’s side and set out for the town landing.

Governor Endicott was on hand to receive Winthrop and his
associates and to conduct them on a tour of inspection of such public
works as had been accomplished during the past two years.

“It is my sorrow, Master Winthrop, that we have not accom-
plished more, but there is much difficulty in clearing land and building
houses in this new country. Then, too, hired servants will not labor
with the zeal that men toil in their own behalf.”

“I can readily understand, Master Endicott, that human nature
does not change with crossing the great sea. I am sure that you have
accomplished all that was humanly possible. It distresses me to find
that you have encountered so great a scourge of illness and death.”
“How great a scourge that has been to us no man can know. To
have buried more than a third part of our whole Company in one
winter is an experience that may well chill the heart of the bravest
among us.”

“Master Endicott, I may as well be frank with you. We have
serious misgivings about settling more planters in this vicinity, than
you now have, seeing we must rely for subsistence largely upon the
fruits of the soil. We have already discussed the wisdom of further
explorations of this coast. What think you of other regions that you
have visited?”

“There be many goodly rivers and fine harbors, Master Winthrop,
within our patent. If you are bringing so great a number of planters
to settle upon lands for tillage you will find at the head of the bay
called Massachusetts a likely region for habitation.”

“When we have had sufficient time to rest and refresh ourselves
on land, it is my purpose to go in person, with others in authority, and
see with our own eyes the regions you mention.”

It will be remembered that John Endicott had been elected to
the board of assistants of the new administration. It was the present
policy of Winthrop and his advisers to make a thorough investigation
of conditions in the Salem Colony. A series of informal meetings
were accordingly held at which Endicott laid bare all the details of
his administration, furnishing facts and figures as to the cost of this

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

and that public work. The more they discussed the problem of the
Company servants, what should be done to feed them, to pay their
wages, to keep them profitably employed, the more baffling that prob-
lem appeared.

“I am persuaded that it was a mistake to have sent over this army
of servants in the first place,” declared Thomas Dudley at one of
these informal meetings.

“And I also,” rejoined Isaac Johnson, “but the mischief was done
and the Bay Company has dearly paid for its mistake. Our present
problem is to provide for these servants and to furnish them food,
since there is no gainful occupation in the plantation at which they
can be employed.”

“There are many houses to build if we are to provide shelter for
the multitude,” suggested one of the stockholders.

“It is true that we might thus employ their services,” responded
the Governor, “but we must not overlook the fact that the Company
itself is not to build houses except for the ministers of the Colony.
If we are to hire these servants out to private planters, and they are
to pay the Company for their labor, will this not breed dissatisfaction
and expose the Company to heavy losses hereafter?”

“Master Winthrop has touched upon the chief issue before us,”
declared Sir Richard Saltonstall. “We come here to the New World
burdened with old debts and with left-over problems. I freely con-
fess that I was one of those who believed that the Company might
reap profits from the labor of its servants in New England; but I
have lived to see my error and now most heartily wish that we were
rid of these unprofitable servants.

“While we were yet in England,” suggested another of the assist-
ants, “we cast off a great burden of debt and reorganized our Com-
pany. Why may we not give these servants their liberty at once and
be rid of them?”

“But we stand to lose vast sums. Upwards of three thousand
pounds have been expended thus far upon them.”

“Even so, Master Winthrop, but will our case be improved if we
continue to add other moneys, with no prospect of profits hereafter?”

“There is meat in what you say. If we now offer them their lib-
erty they may at once find employment from those who seek to build
houses, here or wherever we may decide to settle.”

542

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

The upshot of the conference was a decision to confer with the
leading men among the indentured servants and thus to discover what
their sentiments might be in the matter. During the next two days a
complete survey of the situation was made. Inasmuch as the servants
were bound under indentures which still had several years to run the
proposal to discharge them from these bonds met with enthusiastic
response from the more progressive of the laborers, but with sullen
opposition from others.

Believing that the arrival of other immigrants would assist in con-
vincing even the doubtful servants, Governor Winthrop decided, in
the meantime, to go in person to the bay called Massachusetts and
investigate its possibilities for colonization. It was deemed inadvisa-
ble to sail thither in the “Arbella.” A shallop was accordingly made
ready early on Thursday morning, June seventeenth, and in it
embarked the Governor and his chief advisers. Wind and weather
combined to speed them on their way. The exploring party was
greatly impressed by the scenery of the intervening coast. It will be
remembered that two peninsulas extend into the ocean between Salem
and the present site of the city of Boston. Marblehead was first to be
encountered and seven miles further down the coast, Nahant Point.
Five miles below Nahant the travelers reached the entrance to Boston
Harbor.

In those days the head of the bay, or Boston Harbor, was ringed
about with islands, some of which have since been connected with the
mainland in the extensive filling process and marsh-reclamation that
has taken place. At this distance of time, with one of the great cities
of the world now stretching out in all directions and covering vast
tracts that were once tidal flats, it is hard to visualize the same terri-
tory as a wilderness.

When the Governor’s shallop arrived at a point opposite the head
of the bay they saw before them in the middle distance a wooded
island, later to be known as Governor’s Island. Another body of
land at the left was to be the site of their first fort — Castle Island.
Beyond Castle Island on the left lay the high peninsula called by the
Indians Mattapan, even then the scene of colonizing activity as Win-
throp was that day to discover. When the shallop passed between the
two islands the Winthrop party saw squarely before them another
peninsula, much smaller than the Mattapan headland. Three hills
of peculiar shape adorned its summit.

543

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“That headland is called Shawmut by the savages,” declared their
guide, as he indicated with his hand the bold eminence toward which
they were steering. “It is almost an island at high tide. A planter
named Blackstone lives there, on the other side of the hill facing the
river.”

“Here is a large island at our right,” said Winthrop with some
animation, “and there seems to be a planter’s house upon it.”

“Yes, that is called Winnisimmet by the savages ( but by others
Noodle’s Island). A planter is seated there, Master Samuel Mave-
rick by name.”

As they passed between Noddle’s Island and the high promontory
of Shawmut they beheld yet another headland with two high hills
upon it. These hills were later known as Bunker Hill and Breed’s
Hill — the headland being Charlestown.

“The chief settlement of our planters in this bay is here. Is it
your wish to stop, Master Winthrop?”

“Not until we have explored this river of which you have told me,
for I perceive that it lies before us.”

“There are two rivers here, Master Winthrop. At our left is the
mouth of the Charles River, but the broad stream before us is the
Mystic River.”

“Then let us sail up the Mystic for I have been told that the
Charles has already been explored.”

The righthand shore of the Mystic was then bordered by a salt
meadow of considerable width that extended along the shore between
the mouth of a brook and a larger stream called the Malden River,
each of which flows into the Mystic. Beyond the mouth of the Mal-
den River the land became higher. The Mystic now narrowed to
such an extent that further progress with the shallop was deemed
inadvisable. The party thereupon landed and tramped the wooded
upland a considerable distance, admiring its lofty trees and the variety
of timber to be found in that region.

Wearied at length by the unaccustomed exercise and the heat of
the day, the exploring party returned to the shallop and presently
sailed around the peninsula and into the mouth of the Charles River
to visit the little settlement of Charlestown. The plantation was
tiny indeed. Three brothers named Sprague, with seven or eight
white companions, had settled there the previous year, but had made

544

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

little impression upon the wilderness. The Sprague party had found
one white family already residing there — a Thomas Walford and his
wife. Walford had constructed a house with a thatched roof, on the
south side of Breed’s Hill. He had surrounded this house with a
palisade in order to protect it from the Indians. The Sprague party
had been accompanied by Graves, the engineer, and a group of Com-
pany servants commissioned to build a large storehouse for the use
of the Company in preparation for the present migration. This store-
house was now complete but the planters were living in rude huts.
Charlestown was still little better than a trading post.

To Governor Winthrop, however, this beginning of a settlement
was pleasing indeed. He was. moreover, thrilled to learn from the
planters that one of the Puritan ships had already unloaded a full
cargo of passengers who were at present busily at work on the head-
land of Mattapan that he had seen when first entering the harbor.
Winthrop was puzzled, however, because no ship was at anchor in
the harbor.

“They came on the ‘Mary and John.’ ” explained Ralph Sprague,
“but the rascally captain put them ashore at Oldham’s plantation at
Nantasket.”

“How long ago did this happen?” demanded Winthrop.

“That I cannot say, but a boatload of them came here about two
weeks ago and went up the Charles, where they landed as if to seat
themselves there. The main body of them came no farther than yon-
der headland, so presently the others returned to them. They have
been very busy at Mattapan for a week past.”

Late that afternoon the Winthrop party took their leave of the
Charlestown planters and set out for the headland of Mattapan. As
they passed Winnisimmet or Noddle’s Island, however, they were so
heartily hailed by the planter who lived there that they were con-
strained to pay him a visit. When Samuel Maverick learned the
identity of his visitors his enthusiasm knew no bounds. Evidently,
the possessor of some wealth he had contrived to build himself a
home of comfortable proportions and a sort of fort upon which he
had mounted four small cannon. His hospitality to strangers of his
own race was already well known throughout the entire region.

At his insistence the travelers gladly gave over their intention of
visiting their brethren from the “Mary and John” that night. In

545

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

fact, Maverick himself had come from the site of the new settlement
that afternoon and was full of praise of the energetic manner with
which the Colonists were laboring to provide shelters for their
Company.

“This be a wild country,” remarked John Winthrop as, seated
before the Maverick house after supper was over, the group were
gazing across the harbor with sunset already touching the western
hills.

“A wild country truly,” replied his host, “but a fair and pleasant
place in which to live. Now that a great company are to come to
these shores to build them habitations this wild forest that we see
on every hand will prove a blessing unto them.”

“You mean that we have timber for building at our very doors?”
“Yea, timber for building and much game in the woods — deer
and rabbits and grouse. In the autumn when acorns and nuts are
felled by the frost there are rich gleanings for swine under the for-
est trees. Wild fowl, ducks and geese in their season, come here in
great numbers.”

“Your fisheries seem rich and plentiful,” remarked Sir Richard
Saltonstall.

“You speak truly, Sir Richard, for never in my life did I before
see such plentitude of great fishes of divers kind. In early spring,
shads, alewives and herring are to be found in our rivers in such
shoals as cannot be counted for number.”

“You must not overlook the lobsters we had this night at your
table, Master Maverick. How do you supply yourself with them?”
“The waters of this bay are full of lobsters. Then, too, we have
clams in great abundance. The tide fiats over yonder where the
newcomers are seated are alive with clams. No man need starve in
this region, at least at this time of the year.”

“Then I take it, Master Maverick, there are times when a man
may go hungry even in this paradise.”

“I will not gainsay that possibility, Master Winthrop. There are
times and seasons for all things. An orchard of fruit in our home
country of England gives blessed abundance, but it would be sorry
comfort for an empty stomach in winter, spring or early summer.
Yet of all places in which I have lived this island of Winnisimmet
contents me most.”

546

PIONEERS OF THE ROCK-BOUND COAST

“Tell me of your neighbors, Master Maverick, of this planter
Blackstone, who lives on yonder headland.”

“Master Blackstone is a queer man. He lives alone and has very
little to do with anybody, but he is civil enough when met withal. I
suspect that he was a preacher in England and was put out of his
parish for heresy.”

“And is he your only neighbor who was seated here before our
people came to Charlestown?”

“No, Master Winthrop, for David Thompson came down from
Piscataqua and built him a house on one of these harbor islands. He
and his family still live there. Charlestown, as you call it, was first
occupied by Master Thomas Walford, who lives there to this day.

“Walford, why he must be the man who lives in the palisaded
house on the hillside.”

“The very man. When I came here two years ago Walford,
Thompson, Blackstone and some others who did not tarry long, were
the only white men in these parts. But now we are to have a multi-
tude. I wonder what it will mean to us first comers.”

“You need have no fear that it will bring you harm, Master Mave-
rick. We are enjoined by the Massachusetts Bay Company to treat
the old planters with every kindness and to urge them to join with us
in forming a great English Colony on these shores.”

Thus John Winthrop, who was to live many years in this favored
location — years of American history in the making — first visited the
scene of his future failures and triumphs. He indeed had much to
learn in America, especially of the capabilities of self government by
the common people. That he was wise enough to learn the great les-
sons of democracy and eventually to give himself whole-heartedly to
a new philosophy of government, history bears witness. But that is
another and greater story which the author some day may be privi-
leged to unfold. Now, however, we will take leave of “Pioneers of
the Rockbound Coast” as the era of exploration gives way to the new
era of colonization of Boston and Massachusetts Bay.

547

5pencer an

d Allied Famili

les

By Myrtle M. Lewis, Ridgewood, New Jersey

PENCER and its variant, Spenser, are surnames of official
derivation, from the office of house-steward, one who,
strictly speaking, had charge of the buttery or spence. The
office of “la despencer” or “la spencer” was among the
highest in the King’s household and proportionately great among the
barons.

(C. W. Bardsley: “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

Arms — Quarterly, or and gules, in the 2d and 3d quarters a fret or, over all on a bend
sable, three fleurs-de-lis argent.

(Burke: “General Armory.” W. H. Spencer: “Spencer Family Record.”)
Crest — Out of a ducal coronet gules, gemmed argent, a griffin’s head argent, collared per
pale gules and or, beaked gules, winged or, and charged on the breast and on
each wing with a fleur-de-lis sable.

(W. H. Spencer: “Spencer Family Record.”)

Although there are points in this pedigree which have not been
thoroughly verified, the author of the genealogy, “Spencer Family
Record,” says that Dr. Horatio N. Spencer of St. Louis, in 1900-01,
commissioned Reverend John Holding of Stotfold vicarage to make
this search, and from records available it would seem that the pedi-
gree which follows is quite correct.

(The Family in England)

I. John Spencer, Gentleman, of Southmylles, Bedfordshire, Eng-
land, was living in 14 Edward IV (about 1475).

(W. H. Spencer: “Spencer Family Record,” pp. 10-13.)

II. Robert Spencer, Gentleman, of Southmylles, Bedfordshire,
married Anna Peake of Bedfordshire.

(Ibid.)

III. John ( 1 ) Spencer, Gentleman, of Southmylles, England, mar-
ried Christian Baker. Children: 1. William, Gentleman, of South-

mylles; married Isabella Osborn, daughter of Edward Osborn of
Northampton. 2. Robert, Gentleman, of St. Albans, County Hert-
ford; married Frances Foster, daughter of John Foster of Bramfield.
3. John, of whom further.

(Ibid., p. 13.)

548

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

IV. John (2) Spencer, Gentleman, believed to be a son of John

(1) Spencer, was of St. George’s Parish, Edworth, Bedfordshire, and
died June 9, 1558. He married “Ann,” who is later recorded as
“Widow Ann,” and died June 16, 1560. Children: 1. John, died

April 21, 1560, at Edworth. He is called “son of Ann.” 2. Gerat,
died 1576-77, his will being dated July 8, 1576, and proved May 20,
1577, named his brother Michael executor, and mentioned four chil-
dren, a son, two daughters, and a child unborn; he was a resident of
Biggleswade, Bedfordshire; he married, July 30, 1568, Helen Why-
ston. 3. Michael, of whom further.

(Ibid., pp. 14-18.)

V. Michael Spencer, son of John (2) Spencer and Ann Spencer,

resided at Edworth and Stotfold, Bedfordshire. He married (first),
at Edworth, January 25, 1555, Annis Liner or Nunier, buried Feb-
ruary 23, 1561; (second) Elizabeth, surname unknown, buried
November 18, 1599. Children of the first marriage: 1. John, bap-

tized at Edworth, April 20, 1557, died before 1645 ! married and had
a son, Daniel, who was a grocer in London. 2. Michael, baptized at
Edworth, May 27, 1558; buried April 15, 1560. Children of the
second marriage : 3. Johan, baptized at Edworth, August 20, 1564.
4. Ann, baptized at Edworth, July 24, 1566. 5. Michael, baptized at
Edworth, August 30, 15 66. 6. Alice, baptized at Edworth, August

30, 1566. 7. Thomas, baptized at Edworth, March 12, 1571. 8.

Gerat, of whom further. 9. Richard, baptized at Stotfold, July 9,
1580. It is through the will of Richard, probated June 8, 1646, in
which he names his nephews, the emigrants, that the following
American-English connection has been traced. 10. Catharine, died
before 1646; married Mr. Bland.

(Ibid., p. 18.)

VI. Gerat Spencer, son of Michael and Elizabeth Spencer, was
baptized at St. Mary’s Parish, Stotfold, May 20, 1576, and died
before his brother Richard’s will was probated in 1646. Children:
1. William, baptized at St. Mary’s Parish, Stotfold, October 11, 1601 ;
emigrated to New England in 1630 and settled in Cambridge, Mas-
sachusetts, and later removed to Hartford, Connecticut, in 1638;
married Agnes, and had three children. 2. Elizabeth, baptized

549

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

October 21, 1602; married a Tomlyers. 3. John, baptized at
Stotfold, June 22, 1604. 4. Henry, baptized at Stotfold, August

11, 1605; buried October 20, 1607. 5. Thomas, baptized in Bed-

fordshire, March 27, 1607, died September 11, 1687; emigrated
to New England in 1630 with three of his brothers and settled in Cam-
bridge, Massachusetts, and later went to Hartford, Connecticut, in
1637; married, in 1645, Sarah Reading, and had six children. 6.
Richard, baptized December 11, 1608, died May 6, 1614. 7. Michael,
baptized at Stotfold, May 5, 161 1, died May 6, 1653; came to New
England in 1630 and lived at Cambridge and Lynn, Massachusetts;
married (first) a woman whose name is not known; (second) Mrs.
Robbins, a widow. 8. Jared, Gerrard or Gerard, of whom further.
(Ibid., p. 19.)

(The Family in America)

I. Ensign Jared, Gerrard or Gerard Spencer, son of Gerat Spen-
cer, was born at Stotfold, England, baptized at St. Mary’s Parish,
Stotfold, April 25, 1614, and died in 1685. He came to New Eng-
land in 1630 with his brothers, Thomas, William, and Michael, and
in 1634 was a resident of Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he owned
land on the south side of the river. In 1637 he removed to Lynn,
where :

A Gennerall Courte houlden at Boston the 13th of the First
Month, 1638, Garritt Spencer is granted the fferry at Lynn for two
years, taking 2d for a single pson to the furtherest place, and but id
for a single pson to the nearest place.

Jared Spencer was a juryman from Lynn at a county court held
the 25th of the 10th mo., 1638. In 1653 he administered the estate
of his brother, Michael Spencer, of Lynn. He was made ensign of
the trainband of Lynn, and in 1659 was a Grand Juror. The fol-
lowing year he was in Connecticut, where Simon Lobdell sued him
and his daughter Hannah for damages because she refused to marry
Lobdell. It is probable that he was in Hartford, Connecticut, for a
while. Jared Spencer and his son, John, were included among the
twenty-eight purchasers of the town of Haddam, which was for a
long time part of Hartford County, Connecticut, but later became
part of Middlesex County. Two sons received lots in the division
of 1671 and local records indicate that Jared Spencer was probably

55 o

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

the wealthiest man in the town. In 1637 he became a freeman, was
ensign of the militia and was a representative from Haddam at the
General Court, 1674-75, 1678-81. In Jared Spencer’s will, dated Sep-
tember 17, 1683, probated in 1685, he calls himself of Haddam, Con-
necticut, and bequeaths property and money to his children and to
some of his grandchildren, and gives a pewter flagon and rim “bayson”
to the church at Haddam.

Ensign Jared, Gerrard or Gerard Spencer married Hannah, who
died before September, 1683. Children: 1. John, born at Lynn,

Massachusetts, in 1638, died August 3, 1682. 2. Hannah, born in

1640; married Daniel Brainerd, of Haddam, Connecticut, who died
April 1, 1715, aged seventy-four. 3. Alice, born in 1641; married
(first), in 1662, Thomas Brooks, who died October 18, 1668; (sec-
ond) Thomas Shailer, lost at sea about 1692. 4. Mehitable, born in
1642; married Daniel Cone, who died October 24, 1706, in his
eightieth year. 5. Thomas, born probably at Lynn, about 1650, died
before 1703; married Elizabeth Bates, of Haddam, Connecticut. 6.
Samuel, died August 7, 1705; married (first) Hannah (Willey-
Hungerford) Blachford, who died about 1681, daughter of Isaac
Willey, of New London, Connecticut. Her first husband was Thomas
Hungerford. (Hungerford I.) Samuel married (second) Miriam
Willey, widow of John Willey. 7. William, married Sarah Ackley.
8. Nathaniel, died before 1722; married (first), in 1681, Lydia
Smith; (second) Hannah, surname unknown, who died February 20,
1742. 9. Rebecca, died before 1706; married (first), about 1682,

John Kennard, who died February, 1689; (second) John Tanner, of
Lyme, Connecticut. 10. Ruth, married Joseph Clark, of Haddam.
11. Timothy, of whom further.

(Ibid., p. 19. “Extract from Henry Whittemore’s ‘Our New
England Ancestors and Their Descendants,”’ pp. 57, 58, 59. L. R.
Paige: “History of Cambridge, Massachusetts,” p. 659. Nathaniel
Goodwin: “Genealogical Notes (First Settlers of Connecticut and

Massachusetts),” pp. 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 203, 204.)

II. Timothy Spencer, son of Ensign Jared, Gerrard or Gerard
and Hannah Spencer, died in 1704. W. H. Spencer, in his book
“Spencer Family Record,” says: “Our only source of information

respecting Timothy’s death and that he was the father of a family
we get from the Hartford Probate Records. In Vol. VII, p. 57,

55i

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

August 4, 1704, appears this entry: ‘Timothy Spencer of Haddam

presented an inventory of the intestate estate of his father, Timothy
Spencer deceased of Haddam, and was appointed administrator.’ The
value of the property amounted to over £1,200, which was divided
between his widow and six children.”

Timothy Spencer married a woman whose name is not known,
but who died about 1704. Children: 1. Timothy, died March 29,

1732, was administrator of his father’s will; married, September,
1702, Abigail, surname not known. 2. Sarah, married Joseph Chap-
man, of Saybrook, Connecticut. 3. Hannah, married Azariah Dick-
inson, of Hadley. 4. Deborah, of whom further. 5. Ruth, born in
1689; married Henry Williams, of East Haddam, Connecticut. 6.
Jonathan, born in 1692; died unmarried, and his estate was divided
among his brothers and sisters, November 10, 1715.

(W. H. Spencer: “Spencer Family Record,” pp. 21, 22. Nathan-
iel Goodwin: “Genealogical Notes (First Settlers of Connecticut

and Massachusetts),” p. 204.)

III. Deborah Spencer, daughter of Timothy Spencer, died Octo-
ber 14, 1750. She married John Hungerford. (Hungerford III.)

(F. P. Leach: “Additions and Corrections for Thomas Hunger-
ford of Hartford and New London, Connecticut, and His Descend-
ants in America,” pp. 5, 6, 11, 12. Nathaniel Goodwin : “Genealogi-
cal Notes (First Settlers of Connecticut and Massachusetts),” p.
204.)

(The Sisson Line)

Arms — Per fesse embattled or and azure, three griffins’ heads erased counterchanged.
Crest — A griffin’s head erased or.

Motto — Hope for the best.

(Burke: “General Armory.” Arms used by the family.)

Sisson is probably a place name derived from Soissons, a province
in France. The first members of this family came over to England at
an early date. The poll tax returns of Howdenshire (Yorkshire) for
1379 include the names of Johannes Sisson, Robertus Cisson, Hen-
ricus Sisson, Thomas Cysson and William Cisson.

The English Sissons usually have been Non-Conformists, engaged
in commerce. In America the early generations of Sissons were for
the most part farmers and members of the Quaker sect.

(Arthur A. Wood: “Luther Sisson of Easton, Massachusetts;

His Ancestry and Descendants,” pp. 1-2, 4.)

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

I. Richard Sisson, the American ancestor, was born in England in
1608 and died at Dartmouth, Massachusetts, in 1684. Richard
“Sussel” (sic) was admitted a freeman of Portsmouth, Rhode Island,
on May 17, 1653, and on July 6, 1658, Richard Sisson purchased one
three-hundredth part of Conanicut and Dutch islands. On June 5,
1667, he served as a grand juryman in Dartmouth, Massachusetts.

Richard Sisson was a prosperous farmer having estates in both
Portsmouth, Rhode Island, and Dartmouth, Massachusetts. In his
will, dated October 18, 1683, and proved February 26, 1684, he
bequeathed as follows (abstract) :

Executor, son James. To wife Mary, my dwelling house and
moveables during her life, and £12, yearly rent, with firewood,
orchard, fruit, land for garden, liberty to keep poultry for her own
use, a horse to be maintained and kept at her command to ride on, two
oxen, and two cows, all money due me and a milch cow maintained for
her use, and two parts of all my swine. Her corn to be carried to the
mill and the meal brought home for her use, and ten bushels of new
Indian corn, three bushels of rye and half my wheat and barley.

To son James, all my housing and land in Dartmouth, except land
near Pogansett Pond, etc. To daughter Ann Tripp and her husband
Peleg, land near Pogansett Pond, etc. To son John, all my house
and land in Portsmouth. To son George, £5. To daughter Eliza-
beth wife of Caleb Allen £5. To Indian servant Samuel, a two-year-
old mare. To grandchild Mary Sisson, three cows and a bed, etc.,
on the day of her marriage, and one pewter flagon and brass kettle,
which was her aunt Mary’s.

The inventory of his estate totaled over £600, of which £240 were
for house and lands at Dartmouth, and £60 for house and lands in
Rhode Island. An abstract of his widow’s will follows :

“Mary Sison of Dartmouth widow,” in her will dated “fifteenth
day of the second month Caled aprill,” 1690, “being very ill in body,”
bequeathed as follows (abstract) : To my loving son George Sison

£35 in money and a Bible. To my two grandchildren John and Mary
Sison, children of my son John Sison £35 to be divided equally. All
my brass, pewter, iron, linen and woolen, milk vessels and pails shall
be divided equally between my daughter Elizabeth wife of Caleb
Allin, my daughter Ann wife of Peleg Tripp, and my granddaughter
Mary Sison daughter of my son George Sison (and other bequests to
these three). I acknowledge that I have received of my son James
Sison in full for all estate left me by my husband Richard Sison in his
will; said son to be my executor. Entered September 1, 1693. (Inven-
tory of her estate taken September 22, 1692.)

553

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Richard Sisson married Mary, surname unknown, who died in
1692. Children: 1. George, of whom further. 2. Elizabeth, born

April 8, 1650; married, April 8, 1670, Caleb Allen. 3. James, died
in 1734; married Elizabeth Hathaway. 4. John, died in 1687; mar-
ried Mary, surname unknown, who died in 1687. 5. Anne, died in

1713; married Peleg Tripp, who died January 13, 1714. 6. Mary,
died in 1674; married Isaac Lawton, who died January 25, 1732.

(Arthur A. Wood: “Luther Sisson of Easton, Massachusetts;

His Ancestry and Descendants;” pp. 1-6. “Records of the Colony
of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations,” Vol. I, p. 263. R. A.
Wheeler: “History of the Town of Stonington, Connecticut,” p. 568.
J. O. Austin: “Genealogical Dictionary of Rhode Island,” p. 181.

“New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol. LXII, p.
182.)

II. George Sisson, son of Richard and Mary Sisson, was born
probably in England, in 1644, and died September 7, 1718. At the
time of his father’s death, George Sisson was a prosperous farmer
with a family and had been given a share of his father’s estate which
explains his receiving only £5 in his parent’s will. He was in Dart-
mouth, Massachusetts, for a while with his father, but later returned
to Portsmouth, Rhode Island. In 1687 he served as constable; as
deputy in 1702, 1705, and 1707, as well as justice of the peace in
1703.

George Sisson, in his will dated August 20, 1718, and proved Sep-
tember 20, 1718, made his son Richard Sisson executor, and the fol-
lowing bequests (abstract) :

The eldest son Richard about eighty acres in northerly part of
farm where I dwell, also seventeen acres near “Solentary Hole,” and
all my lands in Warwick. To son George, farm now possessed by him
at Touisset Neck, Swansey. To son Thomas, land at Newport, now
possessed by him. To son John, land and housing in Tiverton, he
making certain payments to my daughters Elizabeth Clarke, Ann
Weeden, Hope Sanford, Ruth Tew and Abigail Tew, and grand-
daughter Jane Sisson, daughter of John. To son James, remainder
of lands in Portsmouth, except family burial place, also two negroes,
twenty sheep, etc. My grindstone to my sons Richard and James. To
my five daughters, and to my granddaughter Sarah Clarke, (other
bequests).

The inventory of his estate amounted to more than £450.

554

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

George Sisson married, probably in England, August i, 1667,
Sarah Lawton, who died July 5, 1718, daughter of Thomas Law-
ton, of Portsmouth, Rhode Island. Children: 1. Elizabeth, born

August 18, 1669, died in 1752; married Jeremiah Clarke. 2. Mary,
born October 18, 1670, died in 1718. 3. Ann, born December 17,

1672; married Philip Weeden. 4. Hope, born December 24, 1674;
married William Sanford. 5. Richard, born September 10, 1676,
died in 1752; married Ann Card. 6. Ruth, born May 5, 1680; mar-
ried Richard Tew. 7. George, born March 23, 1683; married (first),
Mercy, surname not known; (second), at Swansea, Massachusetts,
October 11, 1721, Lydia Cole. 8. Abigail, born March 23, 1685;
married William Tew. 9. Thomas, of whom further. 10. John,
born June 26, 1688, died in 1784; married Rebecca. 11. James,
born July 26, 1690; married, April 17, 1712, Deborah Cook.

(James Savage: “Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers

of New England,” Vol. IV, pp. 102-03. Arthur A. Wood: “Luther
Sisson of Easton, Massachusetts; His Ancestry and Descendants,”
pp. 4-6. JoelMunsell: “American Ancestry,” Vol. XII, p. 9. J. O.
Austin: “Genealogical Dictionary of Rhode Island,” p. 181.)

III. Thomas Sisson, son of George and Sarah (Lawton) Sis-

son, was born September 10, 1686, and died in 1775. He lived in
Newport, Rhode Island, on property willed to him by his father.
Thomas Sisson married Jane, surname not known, who died in 1758.
Children: 1. Giles. 2. William, of whom further. 3. Thomas. 4.

Peleg. 5. Rebecca.

(Arthur A. Wood: “Luther Sisson of Easton, Massachusetts;

His Ancestry and Descendants,” pp. 4-6. James Savage: “Genea-

logical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England,” Vol. IV,
p. 103. R. A. Wheeler: “History of the Town of Stonington, Con-
necticut,” p. 568. J. O. Austin: “One Hundred and Sixty Allied
Families, Providence, Rhode Island,” p. 212.)

IV. William Sisson, son of Thomas and Jane Sisson, died before

May 12, 1776. He was a prosperous farmer and a well-known resi-
dent of Stonington, Connecticut. William Sisson married Hannah,
whose surname has not been found. Children, born at Westerly,
Rhode Island: 1. Oliver, born March 30, 1738; married, June 17,

1762, Mary Park, of Preston, Connecticut. 2. Nathan, born April
14, 1740. 3. Hannah, born June 17, 1742, died soon afterward. 4.
William, born July 12, 1744, died October 15, 1798; married, April

555

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

io, 1766, Mary or Marey Noyes, of Stonington. 5. Benajah, born
September 2 or 17, 1746. 6. James, born August 25, 1748. 7. Abi-
gail, born October 24, 1750. 8. Jonathan, of whom further. 9.

Hannah, born June 7 or 17, 1755. 10. Thomas, born April 4, 1758,

died October 2, 1841; married, at Westerly, Rhode Island, January
19, 1 783> Abigail Cottrell.

(R. A. Wheeler: “History of the Town of Stonington, Connecti-
cut,” pp. 568-69. J. N. Arnold: “Vital Record of Rhode Island,”

Vol. V, pp. 59, 133.)

V. Captain Jonathan (1) Sisson, son of William and Hannah Sis-
son, was born at Westerly, Rhode Island, May 2, 1753, and died
December 8, 1833. He lived for some time in Hopkinton, Rhode
Island, but about 1800 he removed to Lyme, Connecticut, where he
owned a farm and operated it in conjunction with a gristmill and a
sawmill. He was one of the most progressive citizens of the town.
Both he and his wife were buried in the Sisson graveyard in the north-
ern part of the town of Lyme, near the Salem line. In 1801 or 1802
he removed to North Lyme, New London County. He bought a
large tract of land, houses, and a grist, fulling, and sawmill from
James Gould.

Captain Sisson served in the Revolutionary War. The Veterans’
Administration in Washington, District of Columbia, has a very com-
plete record of him, which follows :

Jonathan Sisson was born May 2, 1753, in Westerly, Washington
County, Rhode Island. He was the son of William Sisson, name of
his mother not given.

While residing in said Westerly, with his widowed mother, he
served for sometime in the year 1775 at various times as private in
the Rhode Island Militia in Captain John Gavit’s Company, Colonel
Joseph Noyes’ Regiment; he guarded the shores of South Kingston,
was stationed a part of the time at Point Judith, and was in General
Sullivan’s Expedition in 1778, length of service, fourteen months.

Jonathan Sisson continued to live in Westerly, Rhode Island, until
he was about forty-nine years of age, then moved to Groton, Connecti-
cut, where he lived four years, and then moved to Lyme, New Lon-
don County, Connecticut.

His commission is still in the possession of a descendant.

Captain ( 1 ) Jonathan Sisson married, at Westerly, Rhode Island,
May 12, 1776, Betsey or Elizabeth Blivin or Bliven, who was born
at Westerly, August 4, 1755, died October 9, 1842, the daughter of

556

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Nathan and Elizabeth (Lewis) Blivin. After the death of her hus-
band, Betsey (Blivin) Sisson was allowed pension on her application
executed December 28, 1847, at which time she was living in Lyme,
Connecticut, aged eighty-two years. June 1, 1840, she was included
in the Federal census of pensions for Revolutionary or military serv-
ices, and at that time she was living in Lyme, and residing in the
family of Amos, surname not given. Children, born at Westerly,
Rhode Island: 1. William, born about 1777, died February 8, 1837;
married Phoebe Holdredge; children: i. Elizabeth, born in 1807. ii.
Nathan H., born in 1809; married, October 30, 1838, Mary A. Mor-
gan; children: a. Jane E., born December 7, 1840; married, April
7, 1875, Gilbert Strong; they lived in North Plain, Connecticut, b.
William M., born December 29, 1843; married Mary Tiffany; child:
(1) William M., Jr., born February 15, 1884. iii. Mary, born June
20, 1812. iv. Phoebe, born March 7, 1815. v. Jonathan, born in
1817. vi. Harriet, born in 1827. 2. Elizabeth, born March 8, 1778,
died in 1862; married (first) John Burdick; (second) William Payne.
3. Jonathan, of whom further. 4. Nathan, born March 23, 1787.
(An inscription in the Sisson graveyard reads that Nathan B. Sisson
was lost at sea January 27, 1812, ae. 25. 5. Oliver, born March 23,

1784 or 1786; married Lucretia Tiffany. 6. Mary, born April 1,
1786 or 1788; married Richard Tiffany. 7. Sarah, born April 12,
1791, died May 5, 1835, “ae. 44”; was unmarried. 8. Nancy, born
June 17, 1790 or 1794, died unmarried November 28, 1856. 9.

Frances, born October 4, 1792 or 1795, died unmarried September
28, 1838. 10. Deziah or Desire, born December 9, 1794 or 1797 ,

died unmarried, April 9, i860. 11. Henry Bliven, born in 1798 or

1799, died at North Lyme, Connecticut, February 21, 1863; mar-
ried Lucinda Shailer.

(“Genealogical and Biographical Record of New London County,
Connecticut,” p. 853. J. N. Arnold: “Vital Record of Rhode Island,
1636-1850,” Vol. V, pp. 12, 59, 80, 133, 134. “Census of Pensioners
for Revolutionary or Military Services: Sixth Census (1840),” p. 53.
“New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol. LXXVIII,
p. 380. Sisson family Bible records. Pension Claim W. 17875, Vet-
erans’ Administration, Washington, D. C.)

VI. Jonathan (2) Sisson, son of Captain Jonathan (1) and Eliza-
beth (Blivin or Bliven) Sisson, was born at Westerly, Rhode Island,

557

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

March 27, 1779 or 1780, and resided in either East Haddam or
Lyme, Connecticut, probably throughout his later life.

Jonathan (2) Sisson married (first) Selina M. Loomis, who was
probably of Chesterfield, Connecticut; she died October 11, 1820,
and was buried in the Sisson graveyard in Lyme. He married (sec-
ond) Hope Spencer, who died at East Lyme in 1865. Children of
first marriage: 1. Charles Frederick, of whom further. 2. Har-

riet M., died November 13, 1820, aged one year and three months,
and was buried in the Sisson graveyard.

(J. N. Arnold: “Vital Record of Rhode Island,” Vol. V, p. 134.
“New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol. LXXVIII,
p. 380.)

VII. Charles Frederick Sisson, son of Jonathan (2) and Selina
M. (Loomis) Sisson, was born at East Haddam, Connecticut, Decem-
ber 7, 1815, and died May 28, 1863. In early manhood, he went to
sea, following this calling for some years as a mariner and naviga-
tor. After returning home, in association with Nathan S. Paddock,
Mr. Sisson bought a small building from William E. Nichols & Com-
pany, March 23, 1848. Under the firm name of “Paddock & Sisson,”
the partners opened a small store. This structure, located in Moodus,
Connecticut, had been built as early as 1830, and for many years it
was known as the “old Purple store.” A fire in 1906 destroyed this
early landmark. The firm of Paddock & Sisson was dissolved June
16, 1854, when Mr. Sisson became sole proprietor. His enterprise
and keen business ability were greatly admired by his neighbors and
friends and until his death he continued as owner and manager of the
store. During the settlement of his estate, the business and property
were sold to David S. Purple and Albert E. Purple, who continued the
store as D. S. & A. E. Purple. David S. Purple had been Mr. Sis-
son’s chief clerk for several years.

A public-spirited citizen, Mr. Sisson was always ready to assume
his share of responsibility in community affairs, and he had a part in
many things outside his business interests. He was included among
those men of sturdy character and high intelligence, who formed the
fabric of strong community life in that generation. From the time of
his first vote, he was a member of the Republican party and his faith
in its principles never faltered. His church affiliation was with the
Baptist denomination.

558

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Charles Frederick Sisson married, February 13, 1842, Louisa Jane
Roberts, born at East Haddam, Connecticut, January 29, 1819, died
at Moodus, Connecticut, April 2, 1898, the daughter of Asha and
Sarah (Paddock) Roberts and niece of Elijah Roberts, of Middle-
town. Children: 1. Louisa Jane, born June 16, 1843, died October

23) 1843, and was buried at East Haddam. 2. Fanny Roberts, born
March 15, 1846, died January 26, 1924; married (first) John Fraser,
of Bay City, Michigan. Following his death, she married (second),
October 17, 1871, James Dunlap Balen. Mrs. Balen was loved and
respected throughout Moodus and the neighboring sections for her
many kind and charitable deeds. A devoted wife and mother, she
nevertheless found time to continue many cultural pursuits. She
spoke several languages fluently, and was an authority on painting.
An artist of talent and ability, she was particularly interested in floral
subjects and one of her chief interests was her own garden in which
she exhibited many rare and lovely flowers. She had traveled widely
and was known as a charming and brilliant conversationalist. James
Dunlap Balen was born at New York City, September 20, 1834, and
died February 25, 1915, son of Peter and Anna Maria (Dunlap)
Balen. His grandfather was also named Peter Balen ; the latter came
from Holland and settled in New York State. James Dunlap Balen
was graduated from Harvard Law School in 1855. He practiced law
for a time, became interested in newspaper work and a little later
entered the manufacturing business in Ulster County. In 1863, Mr.
Balen removed to Oil City, Venango County, Pennsylvania, and at
various times had business interests there as well as in Elizabeth, New
Jersey, and Bay City, Michigan. He retired from active business in
1877, and in 1886 settled in Moodus, Connecticut, at the Sisson home-
stead known as “The Hemlock,” where he spent his remaining years.
In politics Mr. Balen was a Republican. He was among the first to
enlist in the Northern Army in April, 1861, and was a member of the
20th New York State Militia. He was made captain of Company I,
which later became the 80th. He served in command of the camp at
Alexandria, Virginia, and was infantry captain of 15,000 men. James
Dunlap and Fanny Roberts (Sisson-Fraser) Balen were the parents
of: i. James Allen, born May 9, 1888, died as the result of an auto-
mobile accident, May 29, 1921 ; a young man of unusual promise, he

559

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

had been educated at Wilbraham Academy and Springfield Polytechnic
Institute. He served in the World War. 3. Charles Henry, born
February 13, 1847, died December 8, 1850, and was buried at East
Haddam. 4. Frederick William, born November 26, 1849, died
November 6, 1930; married Agnes Grimes Palmes. (Palmes VII.)
5. Sarah Selina, born July 13, 1851, died August 28, 1901. 6.

Charles, born February 27, 1853, died May 28, 1863. 7. Henry,

born May 4, 1855, died September 9, 1855. 8. Allen, born August 6,
1859, died January 7, 1894.

(F. H. Parker: “Contributions to the History of East Haddam,
Connecticut,” Vol. II, clippings from the “Connecticut Valley Adver-
tiser,” December 29, 1916, to May 27, 1921 (at the New York Pub-
lic Library), Sheet 95. “New England Historical and Genealogical
Register,” Vol. LXXX, p. 425.)

(The Palmes Line)

Arvis — Gules, three fleurs-de-lis argent, a chief vair.

Crest — A hand holding a palm branch proper.

Motto — JJt palma Justus. (Crozier: “General Armory.”)

The name of Palmes has been in existence for hundreds of years
dating back to at least 1226, when one Manfred Palmes was living
in Naburn, in the county of York, England, earliest known home of
the family whose history follows.

(M. A. Lower: “Patronymica Britannica.”)

W. S. Appleton, writing in the “New England Historical and
Genealogical Register,” Vol. XXVIII, makes the following statement
in regard to the English ancestry of the Palmes family :

“In Nichols’ ‘History of Leicestershire,’ is the pedigree of one
early settler of Connecticut, which I think has never yet been printed
in this country. It is taken from the Visitation of the County of Leices-
ter, and I have myself seen it at the College of Arms.” Mr. Apple-
ton then gives the following pedigree :

I. William Palmes , of Naburn, Yorkshire, was father of:

II. Guy Palmes, who had a son,

III. Bryan Palmes, who lived in County Rutland, England, at a
place called Ashwell.

IV. Francis Palmes, his son, was also of Ashwell, as was his son,

560

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

V. Sir Francis Palmes, of Ashwell, the father of Andrew, of
whom further.

VI. Andrew Palmes, of Sherborn, in Hampshire, England, son of
Sir Francis Palmes, died at Stapleford, Nottinghamshire, about 1666,
aged seventy-three years. Children (the first five were unmarried) :
1. Thomas. 2. William. 3. John. 4. Guy. 5. Stephen. 6. Edward,
of whom further. 7. Byran, born in 1641 ; resided in Melton, Leices-
tershire, and was living in 1681, at which time he signed the pedigree.
8. Jane. 9. Elizabeth, married Edward Chambers.

(“New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol.
XXVIII, p. 90.)

(The Family in America)

I. Major Edward Palmes, son of Andrew Palmes, was born at
Sherborn, Hampshire, England, in 1638 and died at New London,
Connecticut, March 21, 1715. He came to America in 1658 or 1659
with his brother, Guy Palmes, and they were together in New Haven,
Connecticut. In 1660 Edward Palmes removed to New London,
Connecticut, and his brother settled in Mystic, Connecticut. As rec-
ords in England show that Guy Palmes died unmarried, it is evident
that all of the name born in Connecticut in the succeeding generation
are descended from Edward Palmes.

Soon after settling in New London, Edward Palmes became very
intimate with Governor Winthrop and family, marrying his second
daughter, Lucy. The Governor made Mr. Palmes his chief of staff
and conferred other honors upon the young man, nearly all of which
his townsmen heartily approved.

Mr. Palmes bought large holdings of real estate, and eventually
became quite wealthy for those days.

He was but twenty years of age when he landed in New England,
but many of his intimates soon showed that they looked upon him to
take the lead in affairs of importance, in war and in peace, and he filled
his mission (history and the old records assert) very creditably in
every instance. He was sent to England several times on very impor-
tant missions for the Colonies, and he served under many appoint-
ments for the Crown as well, performing all duties judicially and
honestly.

At the General Court at Hartford, Connecticut, August 28, 1661,
“In reference to ye case depending twixt Caspar Varleet, by way of

561

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

appeale, contr Edward Palmes, This Court doth determine, That
Caspar Varleet shal forthwith make satisfaction to Mr. Palmes for
what is unpaid of ye Bill in Cattle, wth 81. 6s. 6d. for damadge, with
charges.”

March io, 1663, at Hartford, “This Court doth nominate and
appoynt these to be put to ye election, at May Court next, for AssistB;
.... Mr. Edward Palmes” (and four others). May 12, 1664, at
Hartford, “This Court doth nominate and appoynt these to be Com-
missioners in the respective Towns to which they doe belong; ....
Mr. Bruen & Mr. Palmes, Ens .Avery, for New London.”

May 9, 1667, Edward Palmes was chosen a commissioner for
New London, and on October 14, 1669, “Mr. Edward Palmes” was
presented for a freeman in New London, while May 11, 1671, he was
one of the two deputies of the Court, for that place. October 14,
1672, he was made “Captn of the Troope” in New London County,
and on October 17, 1673, the Court granted “Captn Edward Palmes”
two hundred acres of land. This tract he sold to Thomas Parkes,
Sr., to whom it was laid out in 1679.

May 22, 1674, “Major Edward Palmes is invested with Mag-
istraticall power throughout New London County and the Narro-
gancet country.” His name appears many times thereafter on the
Colonial records. “At a Council holden at Hartford, .... May
19th, 1708, Major Edward Palmes, Esqr,” exhibited an order dated
April 29, 1707, “to grant the said Edward Palmes administration to
his late wife Lucy, one of the daughters of John Winthrop, Esqr,
deceased.”

Major Edward Palmes was known to both Thomas Minor and
Manasseh Minor, whose diaries are well-known chronicles of early
events in the vicinity of Stonington, Connecticut. Thomas Minor
writes, March 13, 1667-68, “I was at mr palmes I had a barell of
mallases”; August 10, 1669, “I was at mr. palmes”; March 1, 1675-
1676, “the prisoners were delivered to major palmes” (referring to
“the Indean warr”) ; August 11, 1679, “major palmes was heare”;
March 1, 1681-82, “major palmes was heare.” Manasseh Minor’s
diary has this entry: July 22, 1699, “majar pallms from Ingland.”

Joshua Hempstead, of New London, another celebrated diarist,
says under date of May 6, 1714, “I went to Maj Palmes’s to Carry

562

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Ms Manwaring to buy a Cow.” March 22, 1715, he wrote, “Majr
Edward Palmes died Sudently being well last night & dead in 2^
hours,” and the next day (23d), “I was at ye funeral of Majr Edwd
Palmes in ye foren(oon).” “July 3, 1665, Edward Palmes for Capt.
John Winthrop acknowledges receipt of one thousand feet of Deals.”
“Edward Palms was of New Haven in 1659, a merchant, and
removed the next year to New London. He was a freeman in 1667,
representative in 1671, ’72, ’73, ’74 and ’77, and served as major in

the Indian War of 1675 He died .... leaving a large

estate.” His tombstone inscription reads:

Llere Lyes interred
The Body of Major
Edward Palmes who
departed this life March
Ye 21st Anno Dom. 1714/15
in the 78th year
of his age.

“Major Palmes was active in Philip’s War. Hubbard, in his
‘Indian Wars, Postscript,’ p. 9, makes honorable mention of him. In
late editions of Hubbard the name has been changed to Palmer, which
is an error, and has misled several writers.”

Rev. Simon Bradstreet, in his journal, records the death of
Edward Palmes’ first wife, thus: “In 1676, November 24, Mrs.

Lucy Palmes daughter of Jno. Winthrop, Esq., Govr of this Colony
dyed. She was aged about 36 a vertuous young Gentlewoman.” The
record of his two marriages, the birth of his four children, and death
of one, written on the reverse of the title-page (in Hebrew and Latin)
of the “Prophetae Posteriores,” has been presented (1911) to the
New England Historic-Genealogical Society. “The margins of the
paper have been torn or trimmed.”

Major Edward Palmes married (first), at “Harforci” (Hart-
ford, Connecticut), “the first of m (torn) 6^4” (March 1, 1663-64),
Lucy Winthrop, who died at New London, Connecticut, November
24, 1676, the daughter of Governor John Winthrop. There were
no children by this marriage. Edward Palmes married (second), at
Boston, Massachusetts, September 3, 1677, Mrs. Sarah (Farmer)
Davis, a widow. Children of second marriage, born in New Lon-

563

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

don: i. Guy, born November io, 1678, died at sea April 27, 1696.

2. Andrew, of whom further. 3. A daughter, born October 4, 1684,
died same day. 4. Lucy, born August 30, 1687, baptized at Norwich,
Connecticut, May 20, 1689; married (first), April 2, 1707, Samuel
Gray, whose tombstone, at New London, reads as follows: “Here

lyes ye Body of Mr. Samuel Gray Aged 28 years & 7 Months Decd
May ye 26th 1713.” She married (second) Samuel Lynde, of Say-
brook, Connecticut. Evidently named for Major Palmes’ first wife,
this daughter’s name has confused genealogical writers, who have
erroneously supposed she was a child of the major’s first marriage.
“The Way Manuscript,” by H. R. Way, gives her birth year as
“1661,” though a record, apparently not seen by Mr. Way, shows
that Edward Palmes and Lucy Winthrop were not married until
March, 1663-64. Frances Manwaring Caulkins also errs in saying
“that Lucy Palmes,” who married Samuel Gray, “was a granddaugh-
ter of the first Governor Winthrop of Connecticut.” Her husband’s
tombstone shows that he was born about October, 1684, hence the
Lucy (Palmes) born “August 30, 1687,” of Major Palmes’ second
marriage, was undoubtedly the same who married Samuel Gray in
I7°7-

(Henry Russel Way: “Genealogy of the Paternal Ancestors

and Descendants of Major Edward Palmes Who Emigrated to This
Country in 1659,” a manuscript in possession of Ernest N. Way, of
Hartford, Connecticut, p. 131. J. Trumbull: “The Public Records
of the Colony of Connecticut,” Vol. I, pp. 371, 419, 426; Vol. II, pp.
63, 1 16, 147, 186, 214; Vol. V, p. 65. “The Diary of Thomas
Minor, Stonington, Connecticut, 1653-1684,” pp. 83, 91, 133, 134,
156, 171. “The Diary of Manasseh Minor, Stonington, Connecticut,
1696-1720,” pp. 35, 178. “Diary of Joshua Hempstead, 1711-1758,”
pp. 34, 44. “New England Historical and Genealogical Register,”
Vol. VIII, p. 330; Vol. XI, pp. 28, 107; Vol. XXIII, p. 32; Vol.
LXV, p. 379.)

11. Andrew Palmes, son of Major Edward and Sarah (Farmer-
Davis) Palmes, was born September 24, 1682, baptized at First
Church of Christ, New London, Connecticut, October 1, 1682, and
died June 19, 1721. He resided in or near New London, and was
evidently a neighbor and acquaintance of Joshua Hempstead, who
thus mentions him in his diary:

564

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

February 23, 17 13-14, “I went to Ny/zantic to buy a horse &
bought one of Andrew Palmes for £5 : 1 os :od.” .... May 13, 1714,
“in ye morning Early I went to Andrew Palmes’s & bought a Cow
& Call! for £4 & brought thin home.” .... September 29, 1714, “I
sold a hhd of Rum to Andrew Palmes 3s od p gall l/2 down.” (Evi-
dently Mr. Palmes was a tavern-keeper and his credit was good.)

. . . . September 2, 1716, “Andrew Palmes a Child Baptized

Edward.” .... “I went to See Mr Palmes & Sat up with him all
night.” .... June 19, 1721, “Mr. Andrew Palmes Died of a Con-
sumption.” .... June 20, 1721, “aftern(oon) at Mr. Palmes
funeral.” .... November 9, 1733, “Ms Eliza Prenttis the 2d wife

of Mr Thos Prenttis Died of a Consumption Last night. She was
the wife of Mr. Andrew Palmes deed, he died of a Consumption . . . .
She was forty-eight years of age.” .... June 20, 1758, “att Court
in the aftern(oon) and Looking over the Tombs of the aged. Majr
Edwd Palmes Died in March 1714 in his seventy-eighth year his Son
Andrew in June 1721 in his 39th year.”

That the “Eliza. Grey” whom Edward Palmes married in Bos-
ton in 1710 and who died in 1733 aged forty-eight (as per the diary)
was the same “Elizabeth of Samuel and Susanna Gray born December
21, 1685” in Boston, as stated in John R. Totten’s “Christophers
Family,” is undoubted. But that article is evidently in error in nam-
ing her mother as Susanna Baster, for the marriage of “Samuel Gray
of Salem and Susanna Baster of Boston” did not occur until April 15,
1695, as shown in Boston marriage records. It seems probable that
she was a sister of Samuel Gray, of Boston and New London, who had
married her husband’s sister, Lucy Palmes, in 1707. (There was
yet another Samuel Gray, of Dorsetshire, England, and Boston, Mas-
sachusetts, with a wife Susanna; the latter having been born October
23, 1677, a daughter of Philip and Mary Langdon, and married to a
Samuel Gray in or before 1697.)

Andrew Palmes was married at Boston, Massachusetts, by the
Rev. Benjamin Colman, Presbyterian, February 6, 1710, to Eliza-
beth Grey (intentions read Gray), who was born at Boston, Massa-
chusetts, December 21, 1685, and died at New London, Connecticut,
November 8, 1733, the daughter of Samuel and Susanna Grey or
Gray. She married (second), June 13, 1725, Thomas Prentiss, as his

56s

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

second wife. Children of Andrew and Elizabeth (Grey or Gray)
Palmes, all baptized at First Church of Christ, New London: i.

Guy, baptized April 5, 1713, died March 27, 1757; married, March
6, 1736-37, Mrs. Lucy (Christophers) Douglass. 2. Bryan, of whom
further. 3. Edward, baptized September 2, 1716, died May 31, 1776;
married, October 18, 1740, Lucretia Christophers. 4. Andrew, bap-
tized September 11, 1720, died October 18, 1752. “News is come
(November 15, 1752) that Andrew Palmes 2d is dead in one of ye
French Islands of ye West Indies.”

(“New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol. XII,
p. 57; Vol. XIV, pp. 14, 370; Vol. XXX, p. 33; Vol. LXXXVII, p.
399. Rev. Dr. S. Leroy Blake: “The Later History of the First

Church of Christ, New London, Connecticut,” pp. 454, 475, 477,
478, 482. Henry Russel Way: “Genealogy of the Paternal Ances-
tors and Descendants of Major Edward Palmes Who Emigrated to
This Country in 1659,” a manuscript in possession of Ernest N. Way,
of Hartford, pp. 149-57. “Diary of Joshua Hempstead, 1711-1758,”
pp. 32, 35, 39, 59, no, 266, 704. “Report of Boston Record Com-
missioners,” No. 9, pp. 165, 224; No. 28, p. 29. “New York Genea-
logical and Biographical Record,” Vol. LI, pp. 153, 154, 214. C. J. F.
Binney: “The History and Genealogy of the Prentice or Prentiss

Family,” p. 277.)

III. Bryan Palmes, son of Andrew and Elizabeth (Grey or Gray)
Palmes, was baptized in infancy, at the First Church of Christ, New
London, Connecticut, November 7, 1714, and died at New Haven,
April 12, 1756. He was of the third generation known by Joshua
Hempstead, who frequently mentioned Bryan Palmes in his diary,
as is shown by the following :

August 5, 1737, “I was most of the Day Riding out with Bryan
Palmes to Clemt Leaches and Pine neck to take acknowledgmts
&c.” .... November 21, 1746, “I was all day with William Man-
waring Measuring land that he buys of Bryam Palmes 60 acres in the
2d Teer that was Capt Thos Prentis’s wood lot & also Bryam
Palmes’s Orchard & field that he bot of Hugh Minor that was part
of Lt Clemt Minors &c.” .... November 24, 1746, “afternoon I
went with Bryam Palmes to Remeasure his Swamp lot to Wm Man-
waring & afterwards writing deeds at home till late.” .... Sunday,
November 18, 1750, “Bryam Palmes & the Widow Sarah Way pub-
lished.” .... August 9, 1753, “a child of Bryan Palmes’s Dyed.”

566

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

.... April 12, 1756, “Bryan Palmes Dyed with the Dropsie. he
was a Cripple from his Childhood & left 3 children, aged about 40 I
Suppose.” His widow, Sarah, was administratrix of his estate.

Bryan Palmes married, at New London, Connecticut, December
29, 1750, Sarah (Saveli) Way, widow of Thomas Way. She was
baptized October 16, 1717, and outlived her second husband. She
was the daughter of John and Sarah Saveli, of New London. Chil-
dren, born at New London, Connecticut: 1. Bryan, born October 13,
1751, died August 9, 1753. 2. Janet, baptized August 6, 1753. 3.

Joseph, baptized February 3, 1754. 4. Samuel (twin), of whom fur-
ther. 5. Andrew (twin), born May 6, 1755, died April 11, 1846;
married, July 24, 1782, Sally Mattocks; resided in Litchfield, Con-
necticut, removing about 1819-20 to Richmond, Ontario County, New
York. He “served in the Revolutionary War and had a pension.”
The Federal Census of 1840 shows him to be aged eighty-five, and
residing in the family of William F. Reed in the town of Richmond,
Ontario County.

(Rev. Dr. S. Leroy Blake: “The Later History of the First

Church of Christ, New London, Connecticut,” pp. 477, 522. “Diary
of Joshua Hempstead, 1711-1758,” pp. 323, 471, 559, 612, 666.
Henry Russel Way: “Genealogy of the Paternal Ancestors and

Descendants of Major Edward Palmes, Who Emigated to This Coun-
try in 1659,” a manuscript in possession of Ernest N. Way, of Hart-
ford, p. 157. “United States Census of Pensioners, 1840,” p. 91.)

IV. Samuel Palmes, son of Bryan and Sarah (Savell-Way)
Palmes, was born in New London, Connecticut, May 6, 1755, and
died probably in Ontario County, New York, June 23, 1849. The
Federal census of 1840 lists him as “Samuel Palms,” a pensioner,
aged eighty-five, head of a family in the town of East Haddam, Mid-
dlesex County, Connecticut. The old homestead of Samuel Palmes in
East Haddam, Connecticut, where he reared most of his numerous
family, was still standing in May, 1909. It was a plain and unpre-
tentious gambrel roofed structure.

The looks, manners and habits of Samuel Palmes and his twin
brother, Andrew Palmes, were always so much alike that when any
general characteristic was named it applied to both. They were delib-
erate in manner and slow of speech. The father of these twin broth-
ers died when they were eleven months old and, although he had left a

567

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

substantial estate, it had dwindled through mismanagement and bad
business deals. At the age of fourteen years the twins were bound out
to trades in their native place, New London. Samuel Palmes became
a saddler and trunk-maker, and after the close of the Revolutionary
War made this trade his life business. Andrew Palmes was a boot
and shoemaker. After enlisting in the Revolutionary Army, the twins
were separated for the first time, as they were at once assigned to
different points.

Samuel Palmes married, at East Haddam, Connecticut, Septem-
ber 2, 1781, Mary Foster, who was born at Sag Harbor, New York,
in 1756, and died at East Haddam, December 3, 1824, daughter of
John Foster. Children, all born at East Haddam, Connecticut: 1.

Guy, of whom further. 2. Samuel Foster, born June 9, 1784, died
February 19, 1826; married at New York City, January 28, 1809,
Emma Foster, the daughter of Charles and Mary (Armstrong) Fos-
ter, of Portland, Maine. 3. John, born July 25, 1786. He was in
business with his brother, Guy Palmes, for a time before going West,
where he married. 4. Mary, born about 1788. 5. George Foster,

born July 15, 1790, died November 1, 1836; married at Savannah,
Georgia, March 13, 1817, Caroline Lawrence Williams. 6. Mary or
Polly, born July 9, 1792, died April 10, 1876; married at East Had-
dam, April 17, 1823, Diodate A. Church, a farmer. 7. Oliver, born
July 17, 1795, died July 10, 1862; married (first), at Castine, Maine,
October 13, 1840, Phoebe Johnstone; (second), at New Orleans,
Louisiana, March 10, 1847, Mary Rezeau. He settled in New
Orleans as a merchant and ship chandler. 8. Chauncey, born Feb-
ruary 3, 1799, died on Long Island, June 11, 1853.

(Henry Russel Way: “Genealogy of the Paternal Ancestors and
Descendants of Major Edward Palmes, Who Emigrated to This
Country in 1659,” a manuscript in possession of Ernest N. Way, of
Hartford, pp. 157, 176, 177, 178, 186, 187, 191, 214, 229, 231, 235,
237, 247. “United States Census of Pensioners, 1840,” p. 60.)

V. Guy Palmes, son of Samuel and Mary (Foster) Palmes, was
born at East Haddam, Connecticut, April 16, 1782, and died there
August 3, 1878. He followed the trade of tanner. His house, “a
short distance northerly of the Hemlock Valley Mill site (Hadlyme,
Connecticut) was moved to that location by Guy Palmes about 1824.

568

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

.... It was built by Samuel Ackley about 1810 and advertised by

him as a new house in 1812 Mr. Palmes bought the house

from Chevers Brainerd and occupied it for many years. The prop-
erty belonged to Richard V. Brooks at his death in 1859 and the
Palmes heirs quit-claimed their mortgage interest therein to Lucy D.
Broo&s in 1867.”

Guy Palmes married, at East Haddam, Connecticut, September 22,
1812, Silence Hungerford. (Hungerford VI.) Children, all born
at East Haddam, Connecticut: 1. Caroline Williams, born July 3,

1814, died January 1, 1892; married, September 3, 1834, John Gard-
ner Way, son of Thomas and Sally Randall Way, of Colchester, Con-
necticut. 2. Henry, born April 13, 1816, died April 17, 1848; mar-
ried, in 1845, Maria Jones, of East Haddam. 3. Oliver, of whom
further. 4. John Hungerford, born August 14, 1819, died November
18, 1886; married, September 26, 1847, Lydia Carpenter, of North
Coventry, Connecticut. 5. Mary White, born January 23, 1824, died
July 9, 1885, unmarried. 6. Julia Fordham, born December 6, 1826;
married, July 22, 1852, as his second wife, Ebenezer Snow, of East
Haddam, Connecticut. 7. Sarah Elizabeth, born October 14, 1830;
married, September 10, 1887, James T. Huntley, of Providence,
Rhode Island.

(F. H. Parker: “Contributions to the History of East Haddam,
Connecticut,” an article in the “Connecticut Valley Advertiser,”
November 16, 1923. Henry Russel Way: “Genealogy of the Pater-
nal Ancestors and Descendants of Major Edward Palmes, Who Emi-
grated to This Country in 1659,” a manuscript in possession of Ern-
est N. Way, Hartford, pp. 191, 207, 213, 217, 219.)

VI. Oliver Palmes, son of Guy and Silence (Hungerford) Palmes,
was born at East Haddam, Connecticut, January 20, 1818, and died
there April 23, 1897. He was a tanner by trade and lived in East
Haddam, where he owned a farm.

Oliver Palmes married, March 17, 1845, Eliza Jane Clark, of
Rocky Hill, Connecticut, born March 17, 1823, at Stephentown, New
York, daughter of William B. and Abigail (Lewis) Clark, and died
April 22, 1902, at East Haddam, Connecticut. Children: 1. Ger-

trude Estelle, born at Rocky Hill, March 14, 1846; married, June
13, 1867, Francis Wayland Waterman, of Hartford, Connecticut. 2.
Agnes Grimes, of whom further. 3. Jessie Margaret, born at East

569

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Haddam, Connecticut, July 30, 1859; unmarried in 1909; located in
New York City, a retired school teacher.

VII. Agnes Grimes Palmes, daughter of Oliver and Eliza Jane
(Clark) Palmes, was born at East Haddam, Connecticut, October 7,
1849. She married Frederick William Sisson. (Sisson VII, Child 4.)
(Ibid.)

(The Hungerford Line)

Arms — Sable, two bars argent, in chief three plates.

Crest — Out of a ducal coronet or, a pepper garb of the first, between two sickles, erect,
proper.

Motto — Et Dieu mon appui. (Burke: “Encyclopaedia of Heraldry.”)

The surname Hungerford is probably associated with Hingwar,
a Danish chieftain who lost his life while attempting to cross a ford
in 870 A. D. Hence it should be Hing-war-ford. The name is of
record as early as 1204.

The village of Hungerford is in Berkshire. All of the Hunger-
fords seem to have sprung from a common origin. The first of the
name of historical prominence was Sir Thomas Hungerford, who is
said to have “begun life in the humble situation of register of Wyrie,
Bishop of Salsbury, and is reported to have been the first speaker (in
1377) of ^e House of Commons.” Sir Thomas lived at Blark Boun-
ton, County Oxford, and died in 1398.

(F. P. Leach : “Thomas Hungerford of Hartford and New Lon-
don, Connecticut, and Some of His Descendants, With Their English
Ancestors,” p. 3. F. P. Leach: “Additions and Corrections for

Thomas Hungerford of Hartford and New London, Connecticut,
and His Descendants in America,” p. iii.)

I. TKomas ( 1) Hungerford, who probably belonged to a branch
of the distinguished family in England, although the direct connection
has not been found, died at New London, Connecticut, in 1663. The
Register of Hartford, Connecticut, names Thomas Hungerford as a
proprietor there in 1639, owning a triangular lot with a home on it.
About 1650 he removed to New London, Connecticut, where lands
were granted him in 1651, and in 1652 he was appointed constable.

570

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

In December, 1652, Thomas Hungerford and John Pickett were
given for firewood the land where Fort Trumbull is now located.
Inventory of his estate was taken May 1, 1663, and amounted to
£100.5.6.

Thomas Hungerford’s first wife, whose name is not known, died
before November, 1657; he married (second), about 1658, Hannah
Willey, of New London, baptized at Boston, Massachusetts, died
about 1681, the daughter of Isaac and Joanna Willey. She married
(second) Peter Blachford, of New London and Haddam, Connecti-
cut, died September 1, 1671; (third), in 1673, Samuel Spencer.
(Spencer — American Line — I, Child 6.) Children of Thomas Hun-
gerford’s first marriage: 1. Thomas (2), of whom further. 2.

Sarah, born about 1654; after her mother’s death she went to Ips-
wich, Massachusetts, to live with her father’s sister, Ann Leigh. She
married Lewis Hugh, of Lyme, Connecticut. Child of Thomas and
Hannah (Willey) Hungerford: 3. Hannah, born May 1, 1659;

married Mr. Ross, of Rhode Island.

(F. P. Leach: “Additions and Corrections for Thomas Hunger-
ford of Hartford and New London, Connecticut, and His Descend-
ants in America,” pp. 1, 2, 3. F. M. Caulkins: “History of New

London, Connecticut,” p. 281. Nathaniel Goodwin: “Genealogical

Notes (First Settlers of Connecticut and Massachusetts),” p. 281.)

II. Thomas (2) Hungerford, son of Thomas (1) Hungerford’s
first marriage, was born at Hartford, New London County, Connecti-
cut, about 1648 and died at East Haddam, Connecticut, January 11,
1714. In 1650 he went to New London, Connecticut, with his father,
and remained there until 1687, when he sold the land in New Lon-
don which had been granted to him in 1673, and went to Lyme, Con-
necticut. In 1692 he was in East Haddam following the trade of a
blacksmith. In the records he was styled “Mr.,” and was the first
selectman of the town.

Thomas Hungerford’s will was dated January 11, 17 13-14, and
was proved April 5, 1714. To his wife he bequeathed all his build-
ings, also certain land joining Abell Willee’s land during life; to
grandson, Thomas (son of Thomas), one-half of interest on Stoning-
ton lands, also “half of my fourth division on the east side of the
Eighth Mile River”; to son John and his male heirs “my buildings

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

and the whole of my 190 acre allotment” except what belongs to wife,
Mary, during her life; to son Green, one-half part of interest in lands
in Stonington; also “one half part of my fourth division allotment
east of Eight Mile River; also all my right in Moodus Meadow upon
the Falls River”; to his five daughters, Elizabeth, Susannah, Sarah,
Mary, and Esther, “the remainder of my personal estate”; to grand-
son John “all my right in Lyme and the undivided lands.”

Thomas (2) Hungerford married (first), before June 6, 1671,
Mary Green or Gray, of the Plantation of the Narragansetts in Rhode
Island; (second) Mary Graves, daughter of John Graves. She was
born in England. Children: 1. Elizabeth, died November 17,

1758; married about 1695, Joseph Gates. 2. Thomas, born about
1672, died September 29, 1750; married about 1699, Elizabeth Smith.
3. John, of whom further. 4. Susannah, born about 1676; married
about 1700, Samuel Church. 5. Sarah, born in 1679, died Septem-
ber 25, 1753; married about 1697, Nathaniel Cone. 6. Mary, born
in 1681, died March 16, 1763; married, February 5, 1702, Stephen
Cone. 7. Green, born in 1684, died in 1735; married, March 9,
1:709 , Jemima Richardson. 8. Esther, born in 1687, died May 15,
1749; married, in 17 11, Samuel Gates. 9. Benjamin.

(F. P. Leach: “Additions and Corrections for Thomas Hunger-
ford of Hartford and New London, Connecticut, and His Descend-
ants in America,” pp. 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 17. F. H. Parker: “Contribu-

tions to the History of East Haddam, Connecticut, Moodus, Con-
necticut, 1921-1927” (from the “Connecticut Valley Advertiser,”
June 10, 1921, to April 14, 1927, Vol. I, p. 49 ; Vol. Ill (not paged).
J. H. Beers: “History of Middlesex County, Connecticut,” p. 318.)

III. John Hungerford, son of Thomas (2) Hungerford, was
born at New London, Connecticut, about 1674, and died at East Had-
dam, Connecticut, about July 9, 1748. He was of East Haddam.
His will was dated East Haddam, August 20, 1746, and recorded at
Hartford. To his wife, Deborah, he bequeathed one-third of his
movable estate, the south room of his dwelling-house, the orchard and
fruit trees, five acres of plow land with the privilege of half the barn
and a riding horse or mare; to his eldest son, Robert (who was made
executor) the ratification of what was given him before and one-half
of the house lot; to son Thomas, half of the house lot; to daughter
Ruth or her heirs, thirty pounds old tenor bills; to daughter Jane, ten

572

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

pounds of money in the same tenor; to daughter, Esther, twenty and
five pounds of money in the same tenor; to daughter, Thankful, thirty
pounds of money in the same tenor; to grandsons Levi and Thomas
Hungerford, sons of his daughter, Deborah, deceased, thirty-five
pounds in the same tenor between them.

John Hungerford married, at East Haddam, August 23, 1695, or
December 3, 1702 (records differ), Deborah Spencer. (Spencer —
American Line — III.) Children: 1. Mary, born November 3, 1703,
baptized May 15, 1709. 2. Ruth, born August 16, 1705, baptized

May 15, 1709; married, September 14, 1748, Joseph Shipman. 3.
Jane, born January 27, 1707-08, baptized May 15, 1709; married
Thomas Harvey. 4. Esther, born October 14, 1709, baptized Novem-
ber 27, 1709; married, April 1, 1729, Joseph Day. 5. John, born
August 31, 1712, baptized September 30, 1712, died July 30, 1714.
6. Thankful, born October 22, 1713, baptized December 13, 1713;
married John Watrous or Waters. 7. Robert, of whom further. 8.
Thomas, born April 20, 1718; married, January 7, 1739, Deborah
Chalker. 9. Deborah, baptized August 27, 1721, died before March
6, 1745; married, December 27, 1739, Captain John Hungerford.
“Capt. John Hungerford” was the moderator of the Hadlyme Society
Meeting, December 9, 1742. (Hadlyme was formed from East
Haddam.)

(F. P. Leach: “Additions and Corrections for Thomas Hunger-

ford of Hartford and New London, Connecticut, and His Descend-
ants in America,” pp. 5, 6, 11, 12. Nathaniel Goodwin: “Genealogi-
cal Notes (First Settlers of Connecticut and Massachusetts),” p. 204.
J. H. Beers: “History of Middlesex County, Connecticut,” p. 319.

“First Book, East Haddam Land Records,” in “The New England
Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol. XI, p. 311.)

IV. Captain Robert Hungerford, son of John and Deborah (Spen-
cer) Hungerford, was born January 3, 1716, baptized March 11,
1716, and died February n, 1794. He was of East Haddam, Con-
necticut, and served in the Revolutionary War.

Captain Robert Hungerford married, March 2, 1736, Grace
Holmes. (Holmes IV.) Children, born at East Haddam, Con-
necticut: 1. John, born February 21, 1737, died December 11, 1760;
married Jane Church, of Lyme, Connecticut. 2. Anne, born March
J3> 1 739» died January 14, 1743-44. 3. Captain Zechariah, born

573

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

March 20, 1741, died at East Haddam, November 1, 1816; married
Lydia Bigelow. 4. Deborah, born October 14, 1743, died July 21,
1826; married Lieutenant Uriah Church, Sr. 5. Silence, born May
6, 1747, died February 7, 1794; married Captain Elnathan Hatch.
6. Anna, born August 20, 1749, died February 24, 177 6; married
Abisha Church. 7. Robert, born January 23, 1752, died December
27, 1834; married (first) Lovice Warner; (second), in 1783, Olive
Ely. 8. Grace, born January 5, 1755, died January 15, 1755. 9.

Elijah, of whom further. 10. Grace, born August 16, 1759, died
November, 1759.

(F. P. Leach: “Additions and Corrections for Thomas Hunger-
ford of Hartford and New London, Connecticut, and His Descend-
ants in America,” pp. 12, 36, 51, 52. “New England Historical and
Genealogical Register,” Vol. XII, p. 43; Vol. XIX, p. 363.)

V. Elijah Hunger ford, son of Captain Robert and Grace (Holmes)

Hungerford, was born at East Haddam, Connecticut, November 10,
1755, and died December 9, 1839. He married Rhoda Harvey, born
1759, died January 20, 1835, the daughter of Robert and Rachel
Harvey. Child: 1. Silence, of whom further.

(F. P. Leach: “Additions and Corrections for Thomas Hunger-
ford of Hartford and New London, Connecticut, and His Descend-
ants in America,” pp. 36, 52.)

VI. Silence Hungerford, daughter of Elijah and Rhoda (Har-
vey) Hungerford, was born May 5, 1791, and died February 3, 1866.
She married Guy Palmes. (Palmes V.)

(Henry Russel Way: “Genealogy of the Paternal Ancestors and
Descendants of Major Edward Palmes,” a manuscript in possession
of Ernest N. Way, Hartford, p. 19 1.)

(The Holmes Line)

Arms — Or, three spurred cocks fighting.

(John Holmes : “A Letter of Directions to His Father’s Birthplace (with
notes and a genealogy by D. W. Patterson).”

Holmes and its variants, Holm, Holme, Holms, Home and
Homes, are surnames of local derivation, meaning “at the holm,”
from residence on a holm, an islet in, or a flat land beside, a river. As
a place name the word is to be found all over England, while as a
surname it appears, in its various spellings, in many English records.

(C. W. Bardsley : “Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames.”)

574

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

I. Thomas (i) Holmes, a resident of London, England, was a
lawyer or counsellor of Gray’s Inn. He was killed at the siege of
Oxford during the Civil War in England, probably in May or June,
1646.

Thomas Holmes married Mary Thetford. Child: 1. Thomas,

of whom further.

(John Holmes: “A Letter of Directions to His Father’s Birth-

place (with notes and a genealogy by D. W. Patterson),” p. 15.)

II. Thomas (2) Holmes, son of Thomas (1) and Mary (Thet-
ford) Holmes, was born at London, England, about 1625, and died at
the home of his son, John, in East Haddam, Connecticut, December
12, 1723-24, at the age of ninety-eight years. He came to Virginia
in 1665 during the “great plague,” and later removed to New York,
where he met his future wife. They settled in New London, Con-
necticut. Some years later, he and his son removed to East Haddam,
Connecticut. On his deathbed, Thomas Holmes dictated a letter to his
son, John, in regard to his parentage and his old home. The letter
follows :

This Letter of Directions — from John Holmes — in Haddam — in
New England — for to find — the place where his Father — was Born
and — Brought up In London: He was Son to Thomas Holmes —

councler of Grase-in Who Lived in Saint-Tanirs-parrich in Holborn
— in the Roson Crown Cort in Grafen Lain upper site — aGainst
Grasin Walks — His Mother’s Maden Name was Mary Thetford.
Grandfather was Slain in the Time of the Sevel Wars — att Oxford
Sege. Our : Cort : of : arms are the 3 Spord Coks fighting in a Golden
feild — My Father Came out of England in the time of the Grat plage
— and he thought to have gon Down in to Norfolk — to a place Caled
Lyn whare — we had a Small pece of Land — one Edmond Beel — was
Tennant and had been for many years before but all places being garded
he culd not pass — whear upon he came for virjaney — thenking to have
Returned in a fue years. But it was other ways ordered — for the
contry proved unhelthy to : him and he was poor and Low in the world
— after a while he Recruted — and as It was ordred — Marred — in
New york to one Lucrese Dod ly — dagter to — Mr-Thomas Dod ley —
of London who Keep the tanes Cort-in-Clare Streat in Common Gar-
din in London. She had Two — Brothers — But She Died — a bout 6
— and thirty year a Go — my father Died in Decm 12 1724 — Being a
very aged man — my father so long as he Lived he Lived in hopes of
seeing England a Gain — But he is Dead and Gon and left but only me
his Son being thirty 8 — years of age ....

575

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

These Directions Taken by John Holmes on his father’s Death
Bead.

Thomas Holmes married Lucretia Dudley, who died at New
London, Connecticut, July 5, 1689, daughter of Thomas Dudley, of
New York, and London, England. Child: 1. John, of whom further.

(“New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol.
XIX, p. 362. Henry Willey: “Isaac Willey of New London, Con-
necticut, and His Descendants,” p. 6. J. Savage: “Genealogical Dic-
tionary of the First Settlers of New England,” Vol. II, p. 454. John
Holmes: “A Letter of Directions to His Father’s Birthplace (with

notes and a genealogy by D. W. Patterson),” pp. 2-10.)

III. John Holmes, son of Thomas (2) and Lucretia (Dudley)
Holmes, was born at New London, Connecticut, March 11, 1686-87,
and died at East Haddam, Connecticut, May 29, 1734. He and his
wife lived in New London for a few years after their marriage and, in
1710, the townsmen leased to him “an acre of land by Cedar Swamp,
where his father hath planted some apple trees.” About 1714, he
located in East Haddam, where he had purchased several parcels of
land in 1713. In 1719, John Holmes was town surveyor and, in
1721, he served as selectman. His property was listed at £46 in 1718
and at £128-18 in 1727.

John Holmes married, at New London, Connecticut, February
11, 1706-07, Mary Willey, daughter of John and Miriam (Moore)
Willey. She was born at New London, December 10, 1685, and mar-
ried (second), June 1, 1736, Samuel Andrews, of East Haddam.
Children: 1. Thomas, born at New London, December 4, 1707;

married, January 9, 1732, Lucy Knowlton. 2. John, born at New
London, February 24, 1708-09; married Lucretia Willey. 3. Lucre-
tia, born July 14, 1711. 4. Mary, born February 7, 1712-13; mar-
ried Abel Willey. 5. Christopher, born June 4, 1715, died April 2,
1792; married, March 2, 1736, Sarah Andrews. 6. Grace, of whom
further. 7. Eliphalet, born at East Haddam, July 12, 1722, died
November 30, 1743; married, January 25, 1742, Damaris Water-
house. 8. Sarah, born June 14, 1726; married Nathaniel Niles. 9.
Abijah, born at East Haddam, August 1, 1729, died unmarried.

(“New England Historical and Genealogical Register,” Vol. XIX,
pp. 362-63. Henry Willey: “Isaac Willey of New London, Con-

necticut, and His Descendants,” p. 6. John Holmes: “A Letter of

576

SPENCER AND ALLIED FAMILIES

Directions to His Father’s Birthplace (with notes and a genealogy by
D. W. Patterson),” pp. 51-56.)

IV. Grace Holmes, daughter of John and Mary (Willey)
Holmes, was born at East Haddam, Connecticut, August 4, 1717, and
died April 27, 1798 (or possibly April 27, 1808). She was baptized
June 8, 1735, at which time she joined the East Haddam church.

Grace Holmes married Captain Robert Hungerford. (Hunger-
ford IV.)

(F. P. Leach: “Additions and Corrections for Thomas Hunger-
ford of Hartford and New London, Connecticut, and His Descend-
ants in America,” pp. 12, 36. “New England Historical and Genea-
logical Register,” Vol. XII, p. 43; Vol. XIX, p. 363. John Holmes:
“A Letter of Directions to His Father’s Birthplace (with notes and a
genealogy by D. W. Patterson),” p. 55.)

577

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Americana"

See other formats